In re Boundaries
Hawaii Supreme Court
Appeal prom Commissioner op Boundaries. The evidence being very conflicting, and nearly evenly- balanced, the Court affirms the decision of the Commissioner appealed from. - Ex parte surveys, not followed by adverse possession, have little force as evidence of boundaries.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion op the Court, by
Austin, J.
This case is here on appeal from a judgment rendered by the Boundary Commissioner of Oahu in the matter of the settlement of the boundaries of the Iliaina of Kapahulu. The owners of the adjoining lands of Waialae-nui and Waialae-iki claim that the judgment includes about 1,000 acres of land which properly belong to Waialae-nui.
The territory in dispute is a barren tract lying to the eastward of Diamond Head.
The boundaries of Kapahulu were declared by Boundary Commissioner W. P. Kamakau, by his judgment rendered December 23, 1872, to be nearly as now settled,…
2Cited by6 opinions
- In Re Application of AshfordHawaii Supreme Court · 1968
- State v. KwakHawaii Supreme Court · 1995
- Omerod v. Heirs of KaheananuiHawaii Supreme Court · 2007
- State v. MidkiffHawaii Supreme Court · 1966
- Santos v. PerreiraHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.