In Re Hawaiian Telephone Company
Hawaii Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION OF
ABE, J.
I concur with the substance of the opinion of my brother Kobayashi, and therefore also believe that the decisions and orders appealed from must be set aside. However, I find an additional important reason for setting aside the decisions and orders, not discussed by the opinion of my brother Kobayashi. Also, I feel that the terms of the order in the plurality opinion, with which order I concur only reluctantly, amount to an unwise exercise of our judicial power. Therefore, because of these substantial differences with the opinions of the other members…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Smith v. Illinois Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Hawaiian Paradise Park Corporation, a Hawaii Corporation v. Friendly Broadcasting Co., Inc., an Ohio CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- City of Los Angeles v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Ringsby Truck Lines, Inc. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1967
- In re the Hawaiian Electric Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1957
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.