Legal Opinion

Maximo HILAO, Class Plaintiffs, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ESTATE OF Ferdinand MARCOS, Defendant-Appellant

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 17, 1996No. 95-15779PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

103 F.3d 767

45 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 913, 96 Cal. Daily Op.

Serv. 9090,

96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,085

Maximo HILAO, Class Plaintiffs, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ESTATE OF Ferdinand MARCOS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 95-15779.

United States Court of Appeals,

Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted June 18, 1996.

Decided Dec. 17, 1996.

Mark Lane, Washington, D.C., for defendant-appellant.

Robert A. Swift, Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Jon M. Van Dyke, Honolulu, Hawai'i, for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawai'i; Manuel L. Real, District…

Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Bourjaily v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. Cafeteria & Restaurant Workers Union, Local 473 v. McElroySupreme Court of the United States · 1961

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. (PC) Allen v. BotkinDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019
  2. (PC) Brown v. ReifDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019
  3. (PC) Eleby v. VoongDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
  4. (PC) Howell v. LiddellDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
  5. (PC) Scherffius v. SmithDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API