Hilo Sugar Co. v. Mioshi
Hawaii Supreme Court
Submission without Action. Submission. The undersigned, Mioshi, a Japanese by birth, and the Hilo Sugar Company, respectfully represent that they are parties to a question in difference which might be the subject of a civil action.
Read the full summary
Submission without Action. Submission. The undersigned, Mioshi, a Japanese by birth, and the Hilo Sugar Company, respectfully represent that they are parties to a question in difference which might be the subject of a civil action. That they have agreed upon a case containing the facts upon which said controversy depends, which are as follows: 1. That said Hilo Sugar Company is a Hawaiian corporation, doing business in the District of Hilo, Island of Hawaii. 2. That said Mioshi is serving the Hilo Sugar Company under an instrument in writing signed in Japan by said Mioshi and R. W. Irwin, the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion op the Court, by
Judd, CJ.
' The legal questions involved may be summarized into three points. (1) Is the law of Masters and Servants constitutional? (2) Is the contract legally binding? (3) Is the contract properly stamped? We shall discuss these questions in the above order.
It is claimed by the defendant that, as he is now unwilling to carry out his contract or work any longer for the Hilo Sugar *203Company, the law which compels him to do so is unconstitutional, as his labor under the circumstances would be “involuntary servitude,” which is forbidden by Article 11 of the Constitution.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Ogden v. SaundersSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
3Cited by5 opinions
- In Re the Claim of Mott-SmithHawaii Supreme Court · 1926
- Hawaii Consol. Ry., Ltd. v. BorthwickCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
- Kainea v. KreugerHawaii Supreme Court · 1929
- Macfarlane v. Republic of HawaiiHawaii Supreme Court · 1898
- Hawaii Consolidated Railway, Ltd. v. BorthwickHawaii Supreme Court · 1937