Deponte v. Ulupalakua Ranch, Ltd.
Hawaii Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Tlie only question raised by this appeal is whether or not the trial court abused its discretion in denying plaintiff-appellant’s motion for a new trial under Rule 59(a), H.R.C.P., based upon a claim of newly discovered evidence. After this court rendered its opinion in 48 Haw. 17, 395 P.2d 273, the court on plaintiff’s motion granted him leave to file the motion for new trial in the court below after entry of judgment pursuant to the mandate, the court at the same time cautioning that it was “not intimating one way or the other its views on the sufficiency of the showing of diligence, or…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Toledo Scale Co. v. Computing Scale Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Campbell v. American Foreign SS CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1941
- Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company v. Larry Shaw, a Minor by H. L. Shaw, Next Friend, Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company v. J. H. Carson and C. M. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1959
- Territory v. YoungHawaii Supreme Court · 1933
- Deponte v. Ulupalakua Ranch, Ltd.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1964
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kawamata Farms, Inc. v. United Agri ProductsHawaii Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. McNultyHawaii Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. CaraballoHawaii Supreme Court · 1980
- Matsumoto v. AsamuraHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1985
- Kawamata Farms, Inc. v. United Agri ProductsHawaii Supreme Court · 1997