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.
7 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Mosesgreen2 sentences2016Hawaii Rules of Evidence Rule 201 governs judicial notice of adjudicative facts; it provides that “[a] judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court, or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” “[T]he purpose of the judicial notice rule ,., is to eliminate the necessity of taking the time of the court and the jury to make formal proof of a fact which cannot be disputed.” State v. Moses, 102 Hawai'i 4 2016Hawaii Rules of Evidence Rule 201 governs judicial notice of adjudicative facts; it provides that “[a] judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court, or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” “[T]he purpose of the judicial notice rule ,., is to eliminate the necessity of taking the time of the court and the jury to make formal proof of a fact which cannot be disputed.” State v. Moses, 102 Hawai'i 4 | 2 | 2 |
In Re Estate of Herbertgreen2 sentences2016Hawaii Rules of Evidence Rule 201 governs judicial notice of adjudicative facts; it provides that “[a] judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court, or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” “[T]he purpose of the judicial notice rule ,., is to eliminate the necessity of taking the time of the court and the jury to make formal proof of a fact which cannot be disputed.” State v. Moses, 102 Hawai'i 4 2016Hawaii Rules of Evidence Rule 201 governs judicial notice of adjudicative facts; it provides that “[a] judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court, or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” “[T]he purpose of the judicial notice rule ,., is to eliminate the necessity of taking the time of the court and the jury to make formal proof of a fact which cannot be disputed.” State v. Moses, 102 Hawai'i 4 | 2 | 2 |
STYKE v. Sotelogreen1 sentence2020See Styke v. Sotelo, 122 Hawai#i 485, 489 n.5, 228 P.3d 365 , 369 n.5 (App. 2010). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Van Welden v. Ramsay's Inc.
green
2 sentences2009Van Welden v. Ramsey's, [Ramsay’s] Inc., 199 Kan. 417 , 430 P.2d 298 (1967). 2009Van Welden v. Ramsey's, [Ramsay’s] Inc., 199 Kan. 417 , 430 P.2d 298 (1967). | 3 | 1981–2009 |
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.