In Re Appeal of Bigelow

Hawaii Supreme Court

In Re Appeal of Bigelow

30 Haw. 907

Hawaii Supreme Court·Decided February 23, 1929·No. 1835·Published

Opinion

Per Ouriam.

This is a petition for a rehearing. It is contended by Lyman H. Bigelow, superintendent of public works of the Territory of Hawaii, that in our original opinion we inadvertently failed to notice the provisions of certain sections of the Federal statutes. These sections did not escape our attention hut we thought they were without hearing upon the questions which we considered determinative of the case and therefore they were not mentioned in the opinion. We know of no reason why we should reach a different conclusion from that already announced.

The petition is denied, Avithout argument, under the rule.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Ouriam.

This is a petition for a rehearing. It is contended by Lyman H. Bigelow, superintendent of public works of the Territory of Hawaii, that in our original opinion we inadvertently failed to notice the provisions of certain sections of the Federal statutes. These sections did not escape our attention hut we thought they were without hearing upon the questions which we considered determinative of the case and therefore they were not mentioned in the opinion. We know of no reason why we should reach a different conclusion from that already announced.

The petition is denied, Avithout argument, under the rule.

In Re Appeal of Bigelow, 30 Haw. 907 (haw 1929).

Pincite

30 Haw. 907 (In Re Appeal of Bigelow) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.