 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| City & County of Honolulu v. Sherman, NO. 26896,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a church's challenge to the city's condemnation action, the trial court impermissibly legislated an exception to Honolulu, Haw., Rev. Ordinances ch. 38 by classifying the condominium complex as a "mixed-use" building as ch. 38 did not provide an exception to lease-to-fee conversion of "mixed-use" buildings.
|
|||||
| In re Tax Appeal of Subway Real Estate Corp. v. Dir. of Taxation, NO. 26488,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Assessment of general excise tax for taxpayer's subleasing activities was proper where taxpayer gained or economically benefitted under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 237-2 from such activities. Taxpayer, which did not have a passive role in the transactions, could not be excused from liability for tax by channeling sublease payments directly to landlords.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Kona Coast Servs., NO. 24711,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An arbitrator's award in favor of plaintiff in an action involving the dissolution of a corporation and the distribution of funds to plaintiff was proper where defendant argued for vacatur on "public policy" grounds rather than on grounds enumerated by Haw. Rev. Stat. §§ 658-9 and 658-10.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Straub Clinic & Hosp., NO. 26509,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed the order to compel a second IME of a claimant because the Labor and Industrial Relations Appeals Board had authority to order the IME pursuant Haw. Admin. R. 12-47-31, and good cause existed for the IME where the resolution of claimant's injury was still in dispute.
|
|||||
| State v. Alvarez, NO. 26725,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Hebert, NO. 25754,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not expressly deny defense counsel opportunity to make closing argument during defendant's trial because defense counsel never affirmatively requested opportunity to present closing argument; defense counsel did not object when court announced its verdict without hearing closing arguments and did not file any motions for reconsideration.
|
|||||
| State v. Kim, NO. 26236,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment finding defendant "guilty" of violating Haw. Rev. Stat. § 291C-32(a)(3)(A) was erroneous where offense was punishable by fine only, as provided in § 291C.161(b), and, consequently, was classified as a civil traffic infraction pursuant to § 291D-2; the case was remanded for amended judgment in favor of the State that complied with ch. 291D.
|
|||||
| Anguay v. State, No. 27780,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, March 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
