Legal Opinion

Charman v. Charman

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided October 7, 1907PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OP THE COURT BY

HARTWELL, O.J.

The plaintiffs brought a bill to quiet their title in a parcel of land in their possession devised to them by George Oharman and which the defendant claimed, “by reason of which said claim said premises have been damaged and the above named plaintiffs have been and are unable to dispose of and lease the said premises to advantage.” The prayer is that the defendant be required to set forth the nature of his claim, that the same be determined, that the court adjudge that the plaintiffs are the owners and that the defendant has no right, except as one of the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Scott v. NeelySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Whitehead v. ShattuckSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  3. Holland v. ChallenSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  4. Devine v. Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  5. Smyth v. New Orleans Canal & Banking Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Paiko v. BoeynaemsHawaii Supreme Court · 1912
  2. United States v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Lexington, Ky.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API