Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1970–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Hawaii courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hawaiian Ins. & Guar. Co., Ltd. v. Blair, Ltd.green2 sentences2000Co. v. Blair, Ltd., 6 Haw.App. 447, 449 , 726 P.2d 1310, 1312 (1986)) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). . 2000Co. v. Blair, Ltd., 6 Haw.App. 447, 449 , 726 P.2d 1310, 1312 (1986)) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). . | 2 | 4 |
Pancakes of Hawaii, Inc. v. Pomare Properties Corp.green2 sentences2015Where pleadings fail to allege any basis for recovery within the coverage clause, the insurer has no obligation to defend.” Id., at 291 , 944 P.2d at 88 (citations, internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). 2015Where pleadings fail to allege any basis for recovery within the coverage clause, the insurer has no obligation to defend.” Id., at 291 , 944 P.2d at 88 (citations, internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Hawaiian Holiday MacAdamia Nut Co. v. Industrial Indemnity Co.green2 sentences2000Cf. Pancakes of Hawaii, Inc. v. Pomare Properties, 85 Hawai'i 286, 291 , 944 P.2d 83, 88 (App.1997) (" 'Where pleadings fail to allege any basis for recovery within the coverage clause, the insurer has no obligation to defend.’ ”) (Quoting Hawaiian Holiday Macadamia Nut Co., 76 Hawai'i at 169, 872 P.2d at 233 (quoting Hawaiian Ins. & Guar. 2000Cf. Pancakes of Hawaii, Inc. v. Pomare Properties, 85 Hawai'i 286, 291 , 944 P.2d 83, 88 (App.1997) (" 'Where pleadings fail to allege any basis for recovery within the coverage clause, the insurer has no obligation to defend.’ ”) (Quoting Hawaiian Holiday Macadamia Nut Co., 76 Hawai'i at 169, 872 P.2d at 233 (quoting Hawaiian Ins. & Guar. | 1 | 3 |
Bayudan v. Tradewind Ins. Co., Ltd.green2 sentences2000Co. v. Blair, Ltd., 6 Haw.App. 447, 449 , 726 P.2d 1310, 1312 (1986)) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). [10] The ICA's observation was apparently dictum, inasmuch as the actual holding in Bayudan was that the insurer was not required to defend the insured based on the allegations of the complaint itself. 87 Hawai`i at 384-88, 957 P.2d at 1066-70 . [11] The "named insured" on the Brooks policy was an automobile repair company that owned the truck used to perpetrate the acts against the plaintiff in the underlying lawsuit. 1998Co., 87 Hawai'i 379, 383 , 957 P.2d 1061, 1065 (App.1998) (internal quotation marks, citations, and emphasis omitted). | 1 | 2 |
Keawe v. Hawaiian Elec. Co., Inc.green2 sentences2015Co., 65 Haw. 232, 237 , 649 P.2d 1149, 1153 (1982) (citing Kamali v. Hawaiian Elec. 2015Co., 65 Haw. 232, 237 , 649 P.2d 1149, 1153 (1982) (citing Kamali v. Hawaiian Elec. | 1 | 1 |
Northern Insurance Co. of New York v. Ekstromgreen1 sentence2005Co. of N.Y. v. Ekstrom, 784 P.2d 320, 323 (Colo.1989) (declining to give the phrase “arising out of’ different meanings depending on whether the phrase appeared in a coverage clause or an exclusionary clause). | 1 | 1 |
Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Bank of Hawaiigreen1 sentence1998As it has been noted, “[w]here pleadings fail to allege any basis for recovery within the coverage clause the insurer has no obligation to defend.” Commerce, 73 Haw. at 326 , 832 P.2d at 736 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Reis v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.green2 sentences1994Co., 919 F.2d at 240 ; Reis v. Aetna Cas. & Surety Co. of Ill., 69 Ill.App.3d 777, 782 , 25 Ill.Dec. 824 , 828-29, 387 N.E.2d 700, 704-05 (1979); (2) the inequity of aUowing the insurer to benefit from policy provisions and exclusions after the insurer has shirked its responsibilities thereunder, Sims v. Illinois Nat’l Cas. 1994Co., 919 F.2d at 240 ; Reis v. Aetna Cas. & Surety Co. of Ill., 69 Ill.App.3d 777, 782 , 25 Ill.Dec. 824 , 828-29, 387 N.E.2d 700, 704-05 (1979); (2) the inequity of aUowing the insurer to benefit from policy provisions and exclusions after the insurer has shirked its responsibilities thereunder, Sims v. Illinois Nat’l Cas. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dairy Road Partners v. Island Insurance Co.
green
1 sentence2000Majority at 425, 992 P.2d at 120 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Standard Oil Co. v. Hawaiian Insurance & Guaranty Co.
green
2 sentences1998The supreme court has also held, however, that insureds “ha[ve] a right to expect that their insurance company [will] make a determined effort to ascertain not only from the pleadings but also from the insurer’s own independent investigation whether the insured[s] were entitled to defense representation under [a] policy.” Standard Oil, 65 Haw. at 527 , 654 P.2d at 1349 . 1998The supreme court has also held, however, that insureds “ha[ve] a right to expect that their insurance company [will] make a determined effort to ascertain not only from the pleadings but also from the insurer’s own independent investigation whether the insured[s] were entitled to defense representation under [a] policy.” Standard Oil, 65 Haw. at 527 , 654 P.2d at 1349 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
cluster 551823
green
1 sentence1994Co., 919 F.2d at 240 ; Reis v. Aetna Cas. & Surety Co. of Ill., 69 Ill.App.3d 777, 782 , 25 Ill.Dec. 824 , 828-29, 387 N.E.2d 700, 704-05 (1979); (2) the inequity of aUowing the insurer to benefit from policy provisions and exclusions after the insurer has shirked its responsibilities thereunder, Sims v. Illinois Nat’l Cas. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Duke Power Co. v. Indemnity Insurance
green
1 sentence1970Neither do we see any such distinction on the phrase "arising out of" of Duke Power, supra, or "restricted to" of Continental Cas. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Standard Oil Co. v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York
neutral
2 sentences1970The court, however, held "* * * the language used in the coverage clause of the policy is not suscepticle to that narrow construction * * *. * * * * * * "* * * that no more is necessary than that the work subject the employee of the independent contractor to a peril in which comes from the fact that he is required to be in the place where it strikes when it does so." We fail to see any distinction in substance between the phrase "arising from" of Standard Oil, supra, and our phrase "with respect to". 1970We fail to see any distinction in substance between the phrase “arising from” of Standard Oil, supra, and our phrase “with respect to”. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.