State v. Coney
373 P.2d 903, 46 Haw. 50
Opinion
The defendants-appellants and the plaintiff-appellee have filed separate petitions for rehearing in the above-entitled canse.
The contentions set forth in the respective petitions have been carefully examined and considered. The court finds that the points presented are not new, having been fully briefed and argued by counsel and considered by this court in its decision.
The petitions are therefore denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Coney, 373 P.2d 903, 46 Haw. 50 (haw 1962).
373 P.2d 903 (State v. Coney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
City & County of Honolulu v. Bishop Trust Co.
421 P.2d 300 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1966)
City and County of Honolulu v. Kam
402 P.2d 683 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1965)
In Re the Estate of Campbell
382 P.2d 920 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1963)