 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Leslie v. Bd. of Appeals of the County of Hawai'i, No. 26184,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: County planning director lacked discretion to accept subdivision application without strict compliance with county code requirements; term "shall" in Hawai'i County, Haw., Code §§ 23-63 (1975), 23-64 (1975), 23-65 (1975), and 23-66 (1975) was mandatory. Proposed subdivision fell within definition of "development" found in Haw. Rev. Stat. § 205A-22.
|
|||||
| State v. Adams, NO. 26064,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a reckless endangerment case, a court did not err in refusing to give a proposed jury instruction relating to nonself-induced intoxication, Haw. Rev. Stat § 702-230, because there was no evidence that any medication defendant consumed resulted in his "intoxication" or in the impairment of his mental capacity.
|
|||||
| State v. Kealoha, NO. 26070,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court vacated defendant's conviction for unauthorized control of a propelled vehicle, in violation of Haw. Rev. Stat. § 708-836, and remanded case for a new trial where the trial court erred in precluding him from asserting a mistake of fact defense at trial, in violation of his due process guarantee of a fair trial under Haw. Const. art. 1, § 14.
|
|||||
| State v. Kotis, NO. 25380,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inter alia, court did not err by denying defendant's Haw. R. Penal P. 48 motion to dismiss; defense counsel's repeated avoidance of trial constituted implied continuance, excludable under rule 48(c)(3) for speedy trial purposes, nor had it erred in finding defendant was fit for trial; 6 experts testified that defendant was fabricating his symptoms.
|
|||||
| Aloha Islandair, Inc. v. Hoshijo, NO. 24561,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, January 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Airline company was improperly denied its constitutional right to a jury trial inasmuch as a responding party, who appealed a final order of the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission (HCRC) pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. § 368-16, was entitled to a jury trial on any claims that formed the basis of an award of common law damages by the HCRC.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of Doe, NO. 27115,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, January 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in: (1) denying parents, who retained residual interests in visitation of children, judicial review of decision of children's permanent custodian to deny them visitation; and (2) denying their motion to intervene and Haw. Rev. Stat. § 587-2. And, Haw. Fam. Ct. R. 24(a) were not in conflict regarding visitation during permanent custody.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
