De Freitas v. De Freitas

• Decision Date: 23 December 1920
• Docket Number: No. 1293.,1293.
• Citation: 25 Haw. 717
• Parties: FRANCISCO DE FREITAS v. ISABELLA DE FREITAS, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JOE DE FREITAS.
• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

25 Haw. 717

FRANCISCO DE FREITAS

v.ISABELLA DE FREITAS, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JOE DE FREITAS.

No. 1293.

Supreme Court of the Territory of Hawai‘i.

Submitted December 21, 1920.

Decided December 23, 1920.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREEXCEPTIONS FROM CIRCUIT COURT FIFTH CIRCUIT. HON. L. A. DICKEY, JUDGE.

Syllabus by the Court

This court will not consider an exception to the sustaining of an objection to a question when the record does not disclose any offer to show what the answer would be and that the answer would be material and competent evidence.

An exception which does not bring to the attention of this court some specific question of law which was presented to the lower court is too general to be considered by this court.

E. K. Aiu for plaintiff.

P. L. Rice for defendant.

COKE, C. J. KEMP AND EDINGS, JJ.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY KEMP, J.

This action of replevin to recover five head of cattle or their value, alleged to be one hundred ninety dollars ($190), was commenced in the district court of Lihue, County of Kauai. Judgment was had in favor of the defendant and the plaintiff appealed to the circuit court of the fifth circuit, where a trial was had jury waived, and the defendant again prevailed. The matter is here on exceptions eight in number, six of which relate to the exclusion of evidence offered by the defendant, one to the decision and one to the judgment.

All of the exceptions relating to the exclusion of evidence come clearly within the rule announced in Yim Fat v. Gleason, 24 Haw. 210, to the effect that this court will not consider an exception to the action of the trial court in sustaining an objection to a question asked a witness when the record does not disclose any offer to show what the answer will be and that the answer would be material and competent evidence. None of the exceptions discloses what answer was expected to any of the questions the answers to which were excluded upon objection. We cannot presume that the answers would have been material or in favor of defendant in the absence of a showing as to what the answers would be. The exceptions to the exclusion of evidence must therefore be overruled.

The remaining exceptions are as follows:

Exception No. 7. Thereafter a decision in writing was filed in said cause finding for the defendant, to which decision the plaintiff excepted and the exception was allowed.

Exception No. 8. Thereafter final judgment was filed in the cause, adjudging in favor of the defendant, to which...