Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. DeMello.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided November 2, 2015No. SCWC-10-0000173Published

1Dissent

Dissenting opinion by

POLLACK, J.,

in which Circuit Judge PERKINS joins.

This case requires us to determine whether the Hawai'i restitution statute provides for recovery of lost wages as restitution. In holding that it does, the majority purports to rely on the “plain language” of the statute. I disagree that the statute unambiguously provides for the recovery of lost wages as a category of restitution. When viewing the words of the restitution statute in the context that they are used, it is apparent that the legislature intended to limit the types of financial injuries that are compensable…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Davis v. Michigan Department of the TreasurySupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. King v. BurwellSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  5. United States v. WiltbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1820

33 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