 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Adam v. State, NO. 27630,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Haw. R. App. P. 35 appellate court held circuit court properly denied petitioner's Haw. R. Penal P. 40 petition; inter alia, issues had been previously ruled upon or were waived, rule 40(a)(3), petitioner's claim was patently frivolous and was without trace of support either in record or from other evidence submitted by him, rule 40(f).
|
|||||
| Barnedo v. Dominguez, NO. 26394, NO. 26695, NO. 27035,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in finding in favor of clients in legal malpractice action and in, inter alia, properly denying attorney's motions for summary judgment based on statute of limitations; she effectively abandoned defense at trial by not requesting questions relating to statute in special verdict form and not requesting jury instructions on statute.
|
|||||
| D'Ambrosio v. State, NO. 25961,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in denying inmate's Haw. R. Penal P. 40 petition without evidentiary hearing because colorable claim was presented that he was denied assistance of counsel at Hawai'i Parol Authority minimum-term hearing because inmate did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to presence of counsel when attorney did not appear.
|
|||||
| Gunderson v. Shaw, NO. 26432,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in granting buyer's motion for summary judgment against both husband and wife in an action to order sale of property because at time buyer and wife signed deposit receipt offer and acceptance evidencing her agreement to sell property, she was sole owner of property and buyer had no notice that husband had any interest in property.
|
|||||
| Jack's Tours, Inc. v. Kilauea Military Camp, NO. 27442,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where tour company alleged that federal military camp was transporting members of general public and thus subject to Public Utility Commission regulation as common carrier, dismissal was proper because camp was arm of federal government subject to governmental immunities.
|
|||||
| Jess v. State, NO. 27227,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court held that the circuit court properly denied petitioner's Haw. R. Penal P. 40 petition, because pursuant to rule 40(a)(3), his claims had been previously ruled upon or had been waived and pursuant to rule 40(f), were patently frivolous and without trace of support either in the record or from other evidence submitted by petitioner.
|
|||||
| Narmore v. Kawafuchi, NO. 26812,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where taxpayer filed notice of appeal to tax court in tax court within 30 days of date board of review refiled its order, jurisdictional requirement of Haw. Rev. Stat. § 232-17 was satisfied. It was the filing of the notice of appeal with tax court that initiated appeal, and not filing of copy of notice of appeal with the assessor.
|
|||||
| Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Murphy, NO. 27633,
SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was suspended from practice of law for six months where he failed to provide competent representation, handled legal matter without adequate preparation, neglected a legal matter entrusted to him, failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, and knowingly disobeyed obligation under the rules of tribunal.
|
|||||
| State v. Leeks, NO. 27712,
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I, September 29, 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. |
