Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United Public Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided February 28, 2014No. SCWC-12-0000505Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by

ACOBA, J.,

In Which POLLACK, J., Joins.

In my view, respectfully, (1) the majority’s formulation and application of the doctrine of primary jurisdiction is incorrect in view of Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 89-14 (1993) and precedent, (2) jurisdiction on the constitutional claims rests with the circuit court, (3) jurisdiction of the Hawai'i Whistle-blower’s Protection Act (HWPA), HRS Chapter 378, lies with the circuit court, and (4) collateral estoppel would apply to limit litigation and avoid conflicts where jurisdiction may be asserted on the underlying…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. United States v. Western Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  2. Far East Conference v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  3. Reiter v. CooperSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Ricci v. Chicago Mercantile ExchangeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Konno v. County of Hawai'iHawaii Supreme Court · 1997

17 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