Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Cvitanovich-Dubie v. Dubie

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided June 22, 2011No. 28928Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by

ACOBA, J.

I believe that jurisdiction over the divorce complaint filed by Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant Geraldine Cvitanovich-Dubie (Geraldine) existed in the family court of the first circuit (the court or the family court) for the reasons stated herein, but I respectfully dissent to the majority’s holding that Geraldine’s Hawaii Family Court Rules (HFCR) Rule 60(b) (2010) claims sounding in fraud on the court and undue influence are barred under HFCR Rule 60(b)(3) because she failed to bring them within one year from the entry of judgment. In my view, her…

2Cases cited67 opinions

  1. Klapprott v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. United States v. MayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  4. Anne Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc., Anne Anderson v. Beatrice Foods Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
  5. Elizabeth Albright Latshaw v. Trainer Wortham & Company, Inc., a Corporation Robert J. Vile, a Natural PersonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006

62 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