808 DEVELOPMENT, LLC v. Murakami

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the statutory provisions of HRS § 444–25.5 are mandatory, and a contractor who fails to provide required disclosures to a homeowner before entering into a construction contract is not entitled to a mechanic's lien upon the property
• \A circuit court's decision to deny a request for a continuance pursuant to HRCP Rule 56(f) will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.\ (Brackets and citation omitted.)
• “A circuit court’s decision to deny a request for a continuance pursuant to HRCP Rule 56(f) will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.” (Brackets and citation omitted.)
• “[B]ased upon the plain language of the above statutes, a contractor who fails to [comply with the statutory requirements] may not enforce the contract against the owner and, consequently, is not entitled to a mechanic’s lien upon the property.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).