1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Haw.
  4. 40 Haw.
  5. 40 Haw. 338 (1953)
 

MARK v. CITY & COUNTY OF HONOLULU

NOS. 2873, 2874.

40 Haw. 338 (1953)

Archibald Y.F. MARK, Nora Mark, Jen Fui MOO and Eva Moo v. City and County of Honolulu, a Municipal Corporation, the Hawaiian Electric Company, Limited, and the Mutual Telephone Company. Richard L. Carter and Marie Hanson Carter v. City and County of Honolulu, a Municipal Corporation.

Supreme Court of Hawaii.

Decided September 16, 1953.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

V.T. Tashima, Deputy City & County Attorney (F.A. McKinley, Acting City & County Attorney, with him on opening brief; J.M. Morita, City & County Attorney, with him on reply brief), for plaintiff in error.

N.W.Y. Char (Sau Ung Loo Chan and D.E. Metzger with him on the brief) for defendants in error.

TOWSE, C.J., LE BARON AND STAINBACK, JJ.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY STAINBACK, J.

These two cases were consolidated for trial as they involved the same facts as to the alleged negligence of the defendants.

The original complaints allege that the City and County of Honolulu maintained in the conduct of its business as a municipal corporation an electric-light system for the purpose of lighting the public highway, to wit, Kamehameha highway at Punaluu, Oahu; that the city negligently maintained the insulators...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases