 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| State v. Tolentino, NO. 26446,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in admitting robbery accomplice's statement as a past recollection recorded under Haw. R. Evid. 802.1(4) because the statement, which incriminated defendant, was presumptively unreliable and State failed to rebut presumption with evidence to show statement had sufficient indicia of trustworthiness to meet foundational requirement.
|
|||||
| Tri-S Corp. v. Western World Ins. Co., NO. 26202,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employer's commercial insurer had a duty to defend an executive officer who was sued in wrongful death action for failing to provide a safe workplace for decedent because the bodily injury exception to insured "employee" in the policy did not apply to the officer as an executive officer.
|
|||||
| State v. Buntenbah, NO. 26937,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, April 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An order granting defendant's motion to dismiss charges against him for refusing to comply with a lawful order of a police officer was upheld where at the time defendant received a warning citation, he was not clearly informed of the conditions of the cooling-off period because the fine reflected in the citation was incorrect.
|
|||||
| State v. Guido, NO. 26703,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, April 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for criminal contempt of court, in violation of Haw. Rev. Stat. § 710-1077 (1993), was upheld where given that defendant admitted that he knew that he had a hearing and yet did not appear on that date, there was sufficient evidence to support the determination that he did knowingly disobey the mandate.
|
|||||
| Nash-Givens v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, Inc., NO. 27077,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, April 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Dubois v. Ass'n of Apt. Owners of 2987 Kalakaua, NO. 26129,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, April 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Apartment owner did not intend to appeal dismissal of tort action against association of apartment owners. Owner's declaratory relief action was filed more than 30 days after entry of judgment as required by Haw. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). Association's motion for ejectment was granted and owner did not show due diligence pursuant to Haw. R. Civ. P. 60.
|
|||||
| In re Doe Children, NO. 26872, NO. 26873,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, April 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Family court had not abused its discretion in awarding permanent custody of father's 4 children to department of human services (DHS) and denying his motion for reconsideration because, inter alia, pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. § 587-73, after three years and two home studies, father was unwilling and unable to provide the children with a safe home.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Straub Clinic & Hosp., Inc., NO. 26509,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, April 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Garperio, NO. 26443,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, April 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the State's closing argument that the defense presented no evidence to establish that defendant's wife was having an affair or was pregnant because defendant explained why he thought his wife was having an affair and why he thought she was pregnant with someone else's child.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
