Kahala Royal Corp. v. Goodsill Anderson Quinn & Stifel

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the plaintiff failed to allege that the attorneys \possessed a desire to harm [that was] independent of the desire to protect their clients\
• holding that a non-party has standing to appeal without having intervened in the underlying litigation where a court order \directly binds the nonparty by name\
• concluding that the plaintiff failed to allege that the attorneys “possessed a desire to harm [that was] independent of the desire to protect their clients”
• holding that, in the context of intentional interference with contractual relations and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, the litigation privilege applies to an attorney's representation of a client in arbitration
• finding that abso-lute litigation privilege applied to attorneys’ conduct in managing inspection and review of books and records
• taking an exhaustive look at the litigation privilege in multiple jurisdictions, and concluding that public policy supports applying the privilege to conduct as well as communications

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).