Minton v. Quintal
This text of Minton v. Quintal (Minton v. Quintal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-11-0000317 08-JAN-2014 09:40 AM
SCWC-11-0000317
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
ERIC J. MINTON and RICHARD M. STANLEY, Petitioners/Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs. SIDNEY A. QUINTAL, JOHN C. FUHRMANN, CITY and COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.
CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-11-0000317; CIV. NO. 07-1-2354-12) ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, and Pollack, JJ., Circuit Court Judge Castagnetti, in place of Acoba, J., recused, and Circuit Court Judge Kim, in place of McKenna, J., recused.) Upon consideration of the Motion for Reconsideration (motion) filed on December 23, 2013 by Respondents/Defendants- Appellees Sidney A. Quintal, John C. Fuhrmann, and the City and County of Honolulu, and the records and files herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, January 8, 2014. Curtis E. Sherwood, /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald Matthew S.K. Pyun, Jr., and John P. Moran /s/ Paula A. Nakayama for respondents /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Jeannette H. Castagnetti /s/ Glenn J. Kim
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Minton v. Quintal, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/minton-v-quintal-haw-2014.