 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ass'n of Apt. Owners of Wailuna v. James Hardie Bldg. Prods. Co., NO. 26257,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, August 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A court erred in granting a motion by an association of apartment owners to compel arbitration on its breach of express warranty claims against a building products company where the arbitration provision in the parties' agreement did not establish a clear and unambiguous agreement by the parties to submit their contractual disputes to arbitration.
|
|||||
| Gonzales v. City & County of Honolulu, NO. 27982,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, August 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the judgment in plaintiff's case did not clearly express whether the circuit court entered judgment on all of the multiple causes of action in plaintiff's second amended complaint, the judgment did not satisfy the requirements for an appealable, final judgment under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 641-1(a) or Haw. R. Civ. P. 58.
|
|||||
| Onaka v. Onaka, No. 24463,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, August 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court had jurisdiction over the wife's appeal of orders in her divorce action because the automatic stay of the wife's bankruptcy proceedings terminated on July 11, 2001, and she filed her notice of appeal on August 3, 2001, which was within 30 days as required by Haw. R. App. P. 54, 4.
|
|||||
| Thomas v. Hassler, No. 25475,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, August 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment entered in favor of a law firm on claims of misrepresentation was affirmed. At the times at issue, the law firm represented an insurance company involved in litigation with plaintiff, and the firm was not required to disclose privileged communications to plaintiff and did not misrepresent its relationship with the arbitrator.
|
|||||
| Wright v. Home Depot U.S.A., NO. 27190,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, August 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court vacated judgment dismissing employee's wrongful discharge and discrimination action against his employer because whether employee would be able to demonstrate that his prior drug conviction did not bear a "rational relationship," as stated in Haw. Rev. Stat. § 378-2.5 (Supp. 2002), to his employment was question of fact and not matter of law.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of B.I.N., NO. 27942,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, August 31, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the father filed a notice of appeal of an order divesting his parental rights, there was no appealable, final order until the family court resolved the motion for reconsideration under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 571-54. The father's appeal was dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| State v. Wang, NO. 27574,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, August 31, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed defendant's conviction for prostitution in violation of Haw. Rev. Stat. § 712-1200(1) as the officer testified that defendant agreed to have sex with him for $200, and the court was free to believe the testimony of the officer over that of defendant.
|
|||||
| T.D. v. J.H., NO. 27665,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, August 31, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment as pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. § 571-46, the court could change the parents' non-court-ordered informal shared custody arrangement absent a material change in circumstances as it was in the best interests of the child.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
