The Nature Conservancy v. Nakila

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 party claiming the prescriptive easement has the burden of proving “the same elements necessary to prove acquisition of title by adverse possession”
• finding no abuse of discretion in denying motion to set aside entry of default when non-defaulting party would suffer prejudice, and there was no excusable neglect when defaulting party failed to take any action for more than six months
• finding no abuse of discretion in denying motion to set aside entry of default when non-defaulting party would suffer prejudice, and there was no excusable neglect when defaulting party failed to take any action for more than six months
• no error in excluding hearsay assertion of individual’s personal observation under Hawaii’s version of Evid. Rule 803(20)
• where a plaintiff is known to claim an interest in realty and her address is known, personal service is necessary
• A “motion to set aside an entry of default is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).