Joseph v. Sing Warn
Hawaii Supreme Court
Exceptions from Circuit Court, First Circuit. STATEMENT OF CASE. The principal question presented by the plaintiffs’ bill of exceptions is whether a certificate of award of the Fire Claims Commission is the subject of garnishment. The certificate reads as follows: “Bill and Certificate of Award. “Honolulu, June 17, 1902. “Territory of Hawaii, “Fire Claims Commission. “Claim of Tam Pong. “for “Sing Warn. “Special Appropriation: fire claims commission — awards.
Read the full summary
Exceptions from Circuit Court, First Circuit. STATEMENT OF CASE. The principal question presented by the plaintiffs’ bill of exceptions is whether a certificate of award of the Fire Claims Commission is the subject of garnishment. The certificate reads as follows: “Bill and Certificate of Award. “Honolulu, June 17, 1902. “Territory of Hawaii, “Fire Claims Commission. “Claim of Tam Pong. “for “Sing Warn. “Special Appropriation: fire claims commission — awards. “As Provided by Act 15, Session Laws 1901. CLAIM. • AMOUNT AWARDED. “To damages for loss of property destroyed by orders of the Board…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT BY
HARTWELL, J.
The claim which was adjudicated by the fire claims commission was that of the defendant Sing Warn, and not of Tam Pong, and the award which was made by the commission is in favor of Sing Warn, for whom Tam Pong presented the claim, which was represented before the commission by her attorney, W. A. Whiting, as shown by the testimony in this case.
The certificate is claimed by the plaintiffs to be subject to garnishment, not as a debt but as “effects.” If the debt of which the certificate may be deemed to be evidence were intended to be garnished, there would…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- La Crosse National Bank v. WilsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- Ide v. HarwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Morse v. RobertsonHawaii Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by1 opinion
- Yuen v. Hawaiian Homes CommissionHawaii Supreme Court · 1944