Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Marvin v. Pflueger.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 2012No. SCWC-28501Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by

ACOBA, J.

The majority forecloses Respondenf/De-fendant-Appellant James Pflueger1 (Pflueger) from joining Heidi Huddy-Yamamoto (Huddy-Yamamoto), the owner of one-third of the kuleana parcel at issue, the Haena Kuleana (hereinafter referred to as Haena Kuleana or the kuleana), in the lawsuit for access and water rights over Pflueger’s land brought by Petitioners/Plaintiffs-Appellees & Counter-Claim Defendants-Appellees Richard Marvin, III (Richard III), Nicholas Fred Marvin, and Barbara Nelson (hereinafter collectively referred to as the Marvins), the owners…

2Cases cited62 opinions

  1. United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Wainwright v. SykesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  4. Takeda v. Northwestern National Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
  5. Northrop Corp. v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983

57 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