Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals· 6/9/1983

Hayashi v. Hayashi

Citations

666 P.2d 171
4 Haw. App. 286
1983 Haw. App. LEXIS 118

How courts have described this case

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

noting that \relief [under Rule 60(b)(6)] is extraordinary and the movant must show that . . . the motion is made within a reasonable time\
noting that “relief [under Rule 60(b)(6) ] is extraordinary and the movant must show that ... the motion is made within a reasonable time”
noting that relief under Rule 60(b)(6) \calls for diligence by the moving party\
holding, inter alia, that \[t]he trial court may deny relief under Rule 6 0(b) without holding a hearing and may decide the issue on the basis of papers submitted\
noting that the family coui*t did not specifically hold that the claim was barred by laches, but reasoning that the family court’s “finding was in fact equivalent to a determination that laches was a bar”
noting-that relief under Rule 60(b)(6) “calls for diligence by the moving party”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Burns, C.J., and Heen and Tanaka

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

24 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.