Legal Opinion
Richardson v. City and County of Honolulu
District Court, D. Hawaii
Decided March 13, 1991No. Civ. 90-00856 DAEPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S COUNTER-MOTION TO DISMISS OR ABSTAIN OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR, IN THE FURTHER ALTERNATIVE, FOR RELIEF UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 56(f)
DAVID A. EZRA, District Judge.
Plaintiffs William S. Richardson, Henry H. Peters, Oswald K. Stender, Myron B. Thompson, and Matsuo Takabuki (“plaintiffs”) bring this motion for partial summary judgment 1 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. The defendant City and County of Honolulu (“City”) brings a counter-motion to dismiss or…
2Cases cited79 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Doughty v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, LondonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
- Richardson v. City and County of HonoluluDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1992
- McNally v. University of HawaiiDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2011
- CBS, INC. v. HenkinDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1992
- Rent Stabilization Ass'n of New York City, Inc. v. DinkinsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1992
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.