Legal Opinion

Bowler v. Board of Immigration

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided July 5, 1889PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal prom Dole, J., on Allowance op Attorney’s Fees and Commissions. .

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court, by

Judd, C.J. Dole, J., Dissenting.

The appeals in the above entitled causes, bringing up the same question, are by agreement considered together.

In the first case the Attorney-General, who appeared ex officio for the Board of Immigration, presented a bill of costs for taxation, which contained the items of attorney’s fees for drawing various pleadings and for attendances, etc., and also for $232.50 attorney’s commissions on the ad damnum. The case had been disposed of by the sustaining by the Court in Banco of defendant’s demurrer.

In the second case the Attorney-General…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. RinggoldSupreme Court of the United States · 1834
  2. The AntelopeSupreme Court of the United States · 1827

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Fought & Co. v. Steel Engineering & Erection, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Hawaiian Isles Enterprises Inc. v. City & County of HonoluluHawaii Supreme Court · 1994
  3. W. C. Peacock & Co. v. CastleHawaii Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Lowrey v. Territory of HawaiiHawaii Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Kanealii v. HardyHawaii Supreme Court · 1905

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