Legal Opinion

In Re French

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 1924No. 1563PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

PERRY, J. (Peters, C. J., concurring in part and dissenting in part.)

This is an information by the attorney general, charging the respondent with professional misconduct. The facts in the case are not difficult of ascertainment. Almost in their entirety, they are shown by undisputed evidence.

About May or June, 1923, one Mills Armstrong came to Honolulu from the mainland under engagement to enter the employment of Hawaiian News & Thrum’s, Limited, a Hawaiian corporation doing a mercantile business in this city, at a salary of $50 per week. The corporation advanced for…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bar Ass'n v. GreenhoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
  2. People ex rel. Attorney General v. BeattieIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
  3. In re HendersonTennessee Supreme Court · 1890
  4. People ex rel. Healy v. BarriosIllinois Supreme Court · 1908
  5. In re HumphreysHawaii Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Board of the Hawaii Supreme Court v. KimHawaii Supreme Court · 1978
  2. In Re TraskHawaii Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. KleinHawaii Supreme Court · 1979
  4. In Re LymanHawaii Supreme Court · 1928
  5. In Re RobertsHawaii Supreme Court · 1928

2 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