Legal Opinion · Dissent

ESTATE OF ROXAS v. Marcos

Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals

Decided February 12, 2009No. 28702Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

NAEAMURA, J.

I respectfully dissent. In my view, the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision in Roxas *129v. Marcos, 89 Hawai'i 91, 969 P.2d 1209 (1998) (hereinafter, “Roxas I”), effectively extinguished the prior judgments entered by the circuit court by changing the party against whom the monetary awards could be enforced. Prior to Roxas I, the judgments had awarded damages against Defendant Ferdinand Marcos (Ferdinand) or Defendant Imelda Marcos (Imelda), as Personal Representative of the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos (Marcos Estate). The Second Amended Judgment, which the circuit…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Roxas v. MarcosHawaii Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Borer v. ChapmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  3. Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & WrightHawaii Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Keliipuleole v. WilsonHawaii Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Lingle v. Hawai'i Government Employees Ass'n, AFSCME, Local 152Hawaii Supreme Court · 2005

13 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