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.
8 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 2009–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Aloha Unlimited, Inc. v. Coughlingreen2 sentences2015Further motions urging them to comply would be useless and only clog up the court's docket." Aloha Unlimited, 79 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI'I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER Hawai‘i at 533, 904 P.2d at 547. laird, on appeal, suggests that the "looming trial deadlines could easily have been dealt with by simply continuing the trial date." This solution, however, is incompatible with the first two factors favoring expediency and efficiency. 2014See Aloha Unlimited, Inc. v. Coughlin, 79 Hawai'i 527, 533, 904 P.2d 541, 547 (App. 1995) (weighing the first two factors against a party that failed to comply with court orders regarding the opposing party's discovery requests). | 2 | 2 |
Kamaunu v. Kaaeagreen1 sentence2026See Kamaunu, 99 Hawaiʻi at 444, 56 P.3d at 746 (concluding the first two factors weighed against default where trial was still required despite default). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Pembertongreen2 sentences2019Additionally, "the fact that defense counsel was repeatedly forced to object and the court repeatedly forced to sustain those objections and to issue cautionary instructions is likely to have had the ... effect of focusing the jury's attention on that evidence and the fact that it was being suppressed." Pemberton , 71 Haw. at 476 , 796 P.2d at 85 (citation omitted). 15 As such, with regard to the first two factors in our analysis of prosecutorial misconduct, we conclude the circuit court's efforts were insufficient to eliminate the prejudicial effect of the DPA's improper conduct. a. 2019Additionally, "the fact that defense counsel was repeatedly forced to object and the court repeatedly forced to sustain those objections and to issue cautionary instructions is likely to have had the ... effect of focusing the jury's attention on that evidence and the fact that it was being suppressed." Pemberton , 71 Haw. at 476 , 796 P.2d at 85 (citation omitted). 15 As such, with regard to the first two factors in our analysis of prosecutorial misconduct, we conclude the circuit court's efforts were insufficient to eliminate the prejudicial effect of the DPA's improper conduct. a. | 1 | 1 |
Alvarez Family Trust v. Association of Apartment Owners of the Kaanapali Aliigreen2 sentences2018The issue here is not one of "great public import." In civil cases, a matter is of "great public import" "only when such issue affects the public interest." Id. at 491, 221 P.3d at 469. 2018The issue here is not one of "great public import." In civil cases, a matter is of "great public import" "only when such issue affects the public interest." Id. at 491, 221 P.3d at 469. | 1 | 1 |
Ann J. Malone v. United States Postal Service, an Agency of the United Statesgreen1 sentence2015The third factor asks whether the sanctioned party's actions have "impaired [the other party's decision] to go to trial or threaten to interfere with the rightful decision of the case." Aloha Unlimited, 79 Hawai‘i at 533, 904 P.2d at 547 (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Malone v. United States Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 131 (9th Cir. 1987), cert denied sub nom, Malone v. Frank, 488 U.S. 819 (1988)). | 1 | 1 |
Paul v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP., STATEgreen2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 1 |
Hong v. Konggreen2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 1 |
Cabral v. McBryde Sugar Co., Ltd.green2 sentences2009Thus, as in Fujioka and Jorgensen, in this case, on appeal from a summary judgment motion, the first two factors weigh in favor of plain error review, inasmuch as “[n]o additional facts are necessary” and “consideration ... will not affect the integrity of any findings of faet[.]” See id.; see also Cabral v. McBryde Sugar Co., 3 Haw.App. 223, 226-27 , 647 P.2d 1232, 1234 (1982) (addressing issue of whether the defendant was strictly liable for damages, raised for the first time on appeal, because resolution of the issue by this court would not “affect the integrity of the findings of fact”). b 2009Thus, as in Fujioka and Jorgensen, in this case, on appeal from a summary judgment motion, the first two factors weigh in favor of plain error review, inasmuch as “[n]o additional facts are necessary” and “consideration ... will not affect the integrity of any findings of faet[.]” See id.; see also Cabral v. McBryde Sugar Co., 3 Haw.App. 223, 226-27 , 647 P.2d 1232, 1234 (1982) (addressing issue of whether the defendant was strictly liable for damages, raised for the first time on appeal, because resolution of the issue by this court would not “affect the integrity of the findings of fact”). b | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kapelagreen2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hicksgreen2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 1 |
Association of Apartment Owners of Wailea Elua v. Wailea Resort Co.green2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 1 |
Right to Know Committee v. City Councilgreen2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 1 |
In Re Waikoloa Sanitary Sewer Co., Inc.green2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Nofoa.
green
1 sentence2020Under the third factor, the strength of the evidence, an error is harmful when “there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Pauline, 100 Hawai‘i 356, 378, 60 P.3d 12 The trial court sustained four objections to the prosecutor’s improper statements to the jury, but in only two instances struck the evidence and instructed the jury to “disregard the last remark by the attorney[.]” 25 *** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** 306, 328 (2002) (citations and internal quotation omitted); Nofoa, 135 Haw | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Underwood.
green
2 sentences2019Under the first factor, we consider "the nature of the challenged conduct in relation to our criminal justice system generally and the special role of the prosecutor specifically." State v. Underwood , 142 Hawai'i 317 , 325, 418 P.3d 658 , 666 (citing Rogan , 91 Hawai'i at 412 -15 , 984 P.2d at 1238-41 ). 2019Under the first factor, we consider "the nature of the challenged conduct in relation to our criminal justice system generally and the special role of the prosecutor specifically." State v. Underwood , 142 Hawai'i 317 , 325, 418 P.3d 658 , 666 (citing Rogan , 91 Hawai'i at 412 -15 , 984 P.2d at 1238-41 ). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Rogan
green
2 sentences2019Under the first factor, we consider "the nature of the challenged conduct in relation to our criminal justice system generally and the special role of the prosecutor specifically." State v. Underwood , 142 Hawai'i 317 , 325, 418 P.3d 658 , 666 (citing Rogan , 91 Hawai'i at 412 -15 , 984 P.2d at 1238-41 ). 2019Under the first factor, we consider "the nature of the challenged conduct in relation to our criminal justice system generally and the special role of the prosecutor specifically." State v. Underwood , 142 Hawai'i 317 , 325, 418 P.3d 658 , 666 (citing Rogan , 91 Hawai'i at 412 -15 , 984 P.2d at 1238-41 ). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Maluia
green
1 sentence2019Maluia, 107 Hawaiʻi at 25-26, 108 P.3d at 979-80 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Simpson
green
2 sentences2019The State's Opening Statement "An opening statement merely provides an opportunity for counsel to advise an outline for the jury, the facts and questions in the matter before them." State v. Simpson , 64 Haw. 363 , 369, 641 P.2d 320 , 324 (1982) (citations omitted). 2019The State's Opening Statement "An opening statement merely provides an opportunity for counsel to advise an outline for the jury, the facts and questions in the matter before them." State v. Simpson , 64 Haw. 363 , 369, 641 P.2d 320 , 324 (1982) (citations omitted). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Malone v. Frank
green
1 sentence2015The third factor asks whether the sanctioned party's actions have "impaired [the other party's decision] to go to trial or threaten to interfere with the rightful decision of the case." Aloha Unlimited, 79 Hawai‘i at 533, 904 P.2d at 547 (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Malone v. United States Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 131 (9th Cir. 1987), cert denied sub nom, Malone v. Frank, 488 U.S. 819 (1988)). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Shanghai Inv. Co., Inc. v. Alteka Co., Ltd.
red
2 sentences2009Despite the above precedent, the majority argues to the contrary, 7 citing to Montalvo v. Lapez, 77 Hawai'i 282 , 884 P.2d 345 (1994), Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., 92 Hawai'i 482 , 993 P.2d 516 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Blair v. Ing, 96 Hawai'i 327 , 31 P.3d 184 (2001), Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State, 96 Hawai'i 388 , 31 P.3d 901 (2001) [hereinafter OHA ], and Hill, in support of its position. 2009Despite the above precedent, the majority argues to the contrary, 7 citing to Montalvo v. Lapez, 77 Hawai'i 282 , 884 P.2d 345 (1994), Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., 92 Hawai'i 482 , 993 P.2d 516 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Blair v. Ing, 96 Hawai'i 327 , 31 P.3d 184 (2001), Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State, 96 Hawai'i 388 , 31 P.3d 901 (2001) [hereinafter OHA ], and Hill, in support of its position. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Fujioka Ex Rel. Fujioka v. Kam
green
2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Birmingham v. Fodor's Travel Publications, Inc.
green
2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State
green
2 sentences2009Despite the above precedent, the majority argues to the contrary, 7 citing to Montalvo v. Lapez, 77 Hawai'i 282 , 884 P.2d 345 (1994), Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., 92 Hawai'i 482 , 993 P.2d 516 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Blair v. Ing, 96 Hawai'i 327 , 31 P.3d 184 (2001), Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State, 96 Hawai'i 388 , 31 P.3d 901 (2001) [hereinafter OHA ], and Hill, in support of its position. 2009Despite the above precedent, the majority argues to the contrary, 7 citing to Montalvo v. Lapez, 77 Hawai'i 282 , 884 P.2d 345 (1994), Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., 92 Hawai'i 482 , 993 P.2d 516 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Blair v. Ing, 96 Hawai'i 327 , 31 P.3d 184 (2001), Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State, 96 Hawai'i 388 , 31 P.3d 901 (2001) [hereinafter OHA ], and Hill, in support of its position. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Blair v. Ing
green
2 sentences2009Despite the above precedent, the majority argues to the contrary, 7 citing to Montalvo v. Lapez, 77 Hawai'i 282 , 884 P.2d 345 (1994), Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., 92 Hawai'i 482 , 993 P.2d 516 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Blair v. Ing, 96 Hawai'i 327 , 31 P.3d 184 (2001), Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State, 96 Hawai'i 388 , 31 P.3d 901 (2001) [hereinafter OHA ], and Hill, in support of its position. 2009Despite the above precedent, the majority argues to the contrary, 7 citing to Montalvo v. Lapez, 77 Hawai'i 282 , 884 P.2d 345 (1994), Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., 92 Hawai'i 482 , 993 P.2d 516 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Blair v. Ing, 96 Hawai'i 327 , 31 P.3d 184 (2001), Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State, 96 Hawai'i 388 , 31 P.3d 901 (2001) [hereinafter OHA ], and Hill, in support of its position. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Montalvo v. Lapez
green
2 sentences2009Despite the above precedent, the majority argues to the contrary, 7 citing to Montalvo v. Lapez, 77 Hawai'i 282 , 884 P.2d 345 (1994), Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., 92 Hawai'i 482 , 993 P.2d 516 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Blair v. Ing, 96 Hawai'i 327 , 31 P.3d 184 (2001), Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State, 96 Hawai'i 388 , 31 P.3d 901 (2001) [hereinafter OHA ], and Hill, in support of its position. 2009Despite the above precedent, the majority argues to the contrary, 7 citing to Montalvo v. Lapez, 77 Hawai'i 282 , 884 P.2d 345 (1994), Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., 92 Hawai'i 482 , 993 P.2d 516 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Blair v. Ing, 96 Hawai'i 327 , 31 P.3d 184 (2001), Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. State, 96 Hawai'i 388 , 31 P.3d 901 (2001) [hereinafter OHA ], and Hill, in support of its position. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Earl M. Jorgensen Co. v. Mark Construction, Inc.
green
2 sentences2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe 2009Furthermore, contrary to the majority’s claim regarding this court’s “inconsistent[ ] application]” of the second factor, this court, along with the ICA, and even other courts, has in fact consistently applied the second factor, as it was set forth in Hawaiian Land Co. See, e.g., Paul v. Dep’t of Transp., State of Hawai'i, 115 Hawai'i 416, 428 , 168 P.3d 546, 558 (2007) (concluding that the first two factors were met, but the third was not, stating that “[the petitioner’s] argument ... does not necessitate any additional fact-finding on this court’s part, and our resolution of it will not affe | 1 | 2009–2009 |
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.