Kawananakoa vs Polybank Case Digest 205 US 349, April 8, 1907

Kawananakoa vs Polybank Case Digest

Kawananakoa vs Polybank Case Digest


The defendant (appellants) pleaded to the jurisdiction that after the execution of the mortgage a part of the mortgaged land had been conveyed by them to one Damon, and by Damon to the territory of Hawaii, and was now part of a public street.

They contend that the owners of equity of redemption in all parts of the mortgaged land must be joined and that no deficiency judgment should be entered until all the mortgaged premises have been sold.

Macariola vs Asuncion Case Digest – AM No. 133-J, May 31, 1982


Whether a sovereign power like Hawaii can be sued.


The sovereign’s exemption from sut is on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right as against the authority that makes the law on which the right depends.

It is naturally extended to those that originate and change at their will the law of contract and property from which persons within their jurisdiction derived their rights.

The decree of foreclosure and sale under a mortgaged executed by the appellants to the appellee is affirmed.

However it might be in a different case, when the inability to join all parties and to sell all the land is due to a conveyance by the mortgagor directly or indirectly to the territory, the court is not thereby deprived of ability to proceed.

Decree affirmed.

Mr. Justice Harlan concurs in the result.

Kawananakoa vs Polybank Case Digest

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts