Legal Opinion

Walsh v. City and County of Honolulu

District Court, D. Hawaii

Decided July 3, 2006No. CV 05-00378 DAE LEKPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ COUNTER MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

DAVID ALAN EZRA, District Judge.

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.2(d), the Court finds this matter suitable for disposition without a hearing. After reviewing Plaintiffs’ Motion and the supporting and opposing memoranda, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction.

BACKGROUND

On February 1, 2006, this Court granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction of Hawaii Revised Statute Section 78-1(c). In reaching its decision, this Court found…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Huezo v. Los Angeles Community College DistrictDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2008
  2. Alexander Rodarte v. Merced County Sheriffs Department, et al.District Court, E.D. California · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API