Legal Opinion

Amantiad v. Odum

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1999No. 21269PublishedCited by 73 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court by

RAMIL, J.

The instant appeal arises from the circuit court’s denial of plaintiff-appellant Michael Amantiad’s Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure (HRCP) Rule 60(b) 1 motion to vacate the circuit court’s August 26,1997 order granting plaintiff-intervenor-appellee Oahu Transit Services, Inc.’s (hereinafter referred to as “OTS”) motion to enforce settlement, after all parties, including defendant-appellee Christopher Odum, stipulated to dismiss the matter with prejudice.

On appeal, Amantiad essentially contends that the circuit court abused its discretion in denying his motion…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Gray v. Administrative Director of CourtHawaii Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Larry McCall Cross-Appellant v. Gayle Franzen, Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
  4. Franks v. City and County of HonoluluHawaii Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & WrightHawaii Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by73 opinions

  1. Lingle v. Hawai'i Government Employees Ass'n, AFSCME, Local 152Hawaii Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Kaho'ohanohano ex rel. Morales-Kaho'ohanohano v. Department of Human ServicesHawaii Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Ka Pa'akai O Ka'Aina v. Land Use CommissionHawaii Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Matsuura v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Exotics Hawaii-Kona, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2007

68 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