Legal Opinion

Rogers v. Pedro

Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals

Decided March 25, 1982No. 7975PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

HAYASHI, C.J.

In this appeal, appellants seek a reversal of the trial court’s judgment that ordered an easement by necessity under Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 7-1 through a portion of their property. We affirm.

At the outset, we must take note of the appellants’ failure to follow Rule 3(b)(5) of Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii in their opening brief. In this jury-waived trial, the court entered its written findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 52(a). Appellants do not specify or even allege which, if…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Stahl v. BalsaraHawaii Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Palama v. SheehanHawaii Supreme Court · 1968
  3. American Security Bank v. Read Realty, Inc.Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Kneedler v. LaneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1863
  5. Adair v. Kona CorporationHawaii Supreme Court · 1969

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bremer v. WeeksHawaii Supreme Court · 2004
  2. MARVIN, III v. PfluegerHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 2010
  3. Marvin v. Pflueger.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API