protection presumption (Hawaii) · Go Syfert
← Hawaii issues

protection presumption in Hawaii

5 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1947–2008 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Samar, Inc. v. Hofferthgreen
indctapp · 2000 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008The general purpose of such a protection clause in a real estate listing contract "is to protect the broker when he or she has expended time and effort in discovering a purchaser, but the sale of the listed property to that purchaser does not occur until after the expiration of the listing contract." Samar, Inc. v. Hofferth, [5] 726 N.E.2d 1286, 1290 (Ind. App. 2000).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (9)

CaseCitedYears
Top Service Body Shop, Inc. v. Allstate Insurance green
or · 1978
1 sentence

1998Furthermore, “[i]f the actor does not act for the purpose of advancing the interest for the protection of which the privilege is given, he [or she] is not exercising the privilege and is not protected by it.” Id.

11998–1998
Boyd v. United States red
scotus · 1886
1 sentence

1984Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 .

11984–1984
Linder v. Foster green
minn · 1940
2 sentences

1981That being so, they are within the protection of the rule and immune from suit. 209 Minn. at 48 , 295 N.W. at 301 .

1981That being so, they are within the protection of the rule and immune from suit. 209 Minn. at 48 , 295 N.W. at 301 .

11981–1981
Graham v. People green
colo · 1934
2 sentences

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

11947–1947
State v. Joseph green
conn · 1921
2 sentences

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

11947–1947
Davis v. United States green
scotus · 1895
1 sentence

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

11947–1947
The People v. . McCann green
ny · 1857
1 sentence

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

11947–1947
State v. Warner green
vt · 1917
2 sentences

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

11947–1947
State v. Pressler neutral
· 1907
2 sentences

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

1947(See Davis v. United States, 160 U.S. 469 , 40 L. ed. 499; State v. Pressler, 16 Wyo. 214 , 92 Pac. 806 ; Graham v. People, 95 Colo. 544 , 38 P. (2d) 87 ; State v. Warner, 91 Vt. 391 , 101 Atl. 149 ; State v. Joseph, 96 Conn. 637 , 115 Atl. 85 ; People v. McCann, 16 N.Y. 58 , 69 Am.

11947–1947

Where else courts name it

CA 107 (1881–2026) NY 99 (1840–2026) PA 60 (1853–2026) IL 52 (1873–2024) TX 48 (1885–2025) AL 44 (1866–2018) NJ 40 (1830–2026) IN 37 (1872–2024) CT 34 (1920–2023) MD 32 (1878–2014) NC 29 (1891–2025) VA 28 (1919–2024) WA 27 (1912–2026) FL 26 (1917–2020) WI 26 (1888–2018) MO 25 (1889–2024) MA 21 (1869–2025) MN 21 (1925–2025) DC 20 (1972–2025) OH 19 (1907–2024) OR 18 (1875–2020) LA 17 (1940–2008) KS 16 (1913–2005) AZ 15 (1965–2017) KY 15 (1916–2021) MI 15 (1963–2022) DE 14 (1952–2022) NM 14 (1964–2023) SD 13 (1972–2015) GA 13 (1884–2019) CO 13 (1927–2025) AK 12 (1972–2025) OK 12 (1912–2016) IA 12 (1922–2022) NE 11 (1899–2016) SC 11 (1884–2025) ND 11 (1897–2023) WV 10 (1875–2019) MS 9 (1970–2017) AR 9 (1882–2012) ME 9 (1984–2017) TN 8 (1953–2024) WY 8 (1923–2021) ID 7 (1971–2020) RI 6 (1962–2007) VT 5 (1920–1996) NH 5 (1981–2021) HI 5 (1947–2008) NV 4 (1923–2020) UT 4 (1922–2020) MT 4 (1977–1999) PR 3 (1953–1969)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check