Legal Opinion · Dissent

Allen v. Lucas

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1903Published

Error to Circuit Court, First Circuit.

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION OF

GALBRAITH, J.

The language of this statute is not so broad as is claimed. The phrase “any person” used in Section 1773 to indicate who may be plaintiff in the action does not include any one who may cast covetous eyes at a tract of land and who may be able to hire a lawyer and to pay court costs and empower such a person to bring the action to quiet title. The only person who may be defendant in some one who “claims adversely to the plaintiff an estate or interest in real property” and the action may be brought “for the purpose of determining such adverse claim.” The “any…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Holland v. ChallenSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Frost v. SpitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  3. Ely v. New Mexico & Arizona RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  4. Chapman v. JonesIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Kaikainahaole v. AllenHawaii Supreme Court · 1902

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API