Legal Opinion

Arquette v. State.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 2012No. SCWC-11-0000416PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court by

ACOBA, J.

We hold, first, that a plaintiff may bring an action in tort for the maintenance of a malicious prosecution as well as for the initiation of a malicious prosecution. Second, we hold that the Circuit Court of the First Circuit (the court) 1 properly granted the December 24, 2009 motion for summary judgment filed by Respondents/Defendants-Appel-lees/Cross-Appellants State of Hawaii (the State), Stephen H. Levins (Levins), and Michael J.S. Moriyama (Moriyama) (collectively, Respondents) with respect to the claim of Petitioner/Plaintiff-AppellanVCross-Appellee…

2Cases cited64 opinions

  1. Broughton v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. Bertero v. National General Corp.California Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Stewart v. SonnebornSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  4. Zamos v. StroudCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Nelson v. MillerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1980

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Aana v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.District Court, D. Hawaii · 2013
  2. Nakamoto v. Kawauchi.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2018
  3. Ching v. DungHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 2019
  4. Andrade v. ChoDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2021
  5. Dural v. City and County of HonoluluDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2023

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

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

Powered by the Exa API