Legal Opinion
Territory v. McVeagh
Hawaii Supreme Court
Decided March 2, 1916No. 905PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Reserved Question from Circuit Court, First Circuit. Hon. C. W. Ashford, Judge.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT BY
QUARLES, J.
The defendant was charged in the district court of Honolulu as follows:
“That said Thos. McVeagh, at Honolulu, City and County of Honolulu, Territory of Hawaii, on or about the 22nd day of May, 1915, did deduct and retain all of the wages due and payable for the week ending May 22nd, 1915, as and for the services of a certain employee, to wit, one Herbert Alexander, he, the said Herbert Alexander having been employed by him, the said Thos. McVeagh, during said week; and that said Thos. McVeagh thereby collected of and from said Herbert Alexander, a purported…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Holden v. HardySupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- New York Ex Rel. Hatch v. ReardonSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Knoxville Iron Co. v. HarbisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Territory of Hawaii v. MiguelHawaii Supreme Court · 1907
- Dayton Coal & Iron Co. v. BartonSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kapiolani Park Preservation Society v. City & County of HonoluluHawaii Supreme Court · 1988
- Damon v. Shinjiro TsutsuiHawaii Supreme Court · 1930
- Kapiolani Park Preservation Society v. City & County of HonoluluHawaii Supreme Court · 1988