Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law

In re Robinson

Hawaii Supreme Court
In re Robinson, 49 Haw. 574 (Haw. 1967)
423 P.2d 437
Cassidy, Disposition, From, Having, Lewis, Merits, Mizuha, Original, Richardson, Wirtz

In re Robinson

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The right to file a second petition for rehearing after expiration of the time prescribed by Rule 5(a) of this court is questionable. See In the Matter of Davis, 15 Haw. 724; Waterhouse v. Capital Investment Co., 44 Haw. 311, 353 P.2d 1016. At all events the petition is without merit and is denied.

Cassidy and Wirtz, JJ., having dissented from the majority in the original opinion, do not join in the disposition of the petition on the merits.

Reference

Full Case Name
In the Matter of the Application of ELIZABETH COCKETT ROBINSON To register and confirm her title to land situate at Puunau, Honokowai and Kaanapali, District of Lahaina, Island and County of Maui, Hawaii
Status
Published
↑