Case Title: Bank of Hawaii v. Shinn

Citation: 120 Haw. 50

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2009-02-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
no, 27832

TN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

BANK OF HAWAII,
Respondent /Plaintiff-Appellee

Oats

MICHAEL L. SHINN,
Pet itioner/Defendant-Appellant

912 Hd Li essay

 

and

KANACHTKA & LEZAK,
Defendant~Appel

 

BAYS, DEAVER, HIATT,
@ Hawai'i partnership,

and

DONALD T EOVINO; KAHALA VENTURES,
general partnership; FIRST HAWAIIAN BANK; DONALD #.
WILSON, as Trustee of the Jerry 7. Lynn Charitable

Remainder Trust; BéT ENTERPRISES, a California
RICHARD WALLACE and PATRICIA DAVISON

a Hawad't

corporation;

WALLACE, as Trustees of the Muldoon & Associates
Money Purchase Plan and Trust; UNIVERSAL SECURITIES
O., LTD., a Japan corporation; LOREN H. COOK;
DARCY H. COOK; J. ROGER ALLEN; CATHREINE G.
ALLEN; JOHN DOES 1-50; JANE DOES 1-50; DOE
PARTNERSHIPS 1-50; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-50; DOE
ENTITIES 1-50; and DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS 1-50,

Defendants

 

 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
(civ. NO. 93-1151)

 

‘Moon, C.J., Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.
and Retired Justice Levinson, appointed by reason
ef vacancy on January 9, 2003, dissenting,

with whon Nakayama, J., joins)

Upon consideration of the motion for reconsideration

 

filed on January 8, 2009 by Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant
Michael L. Shinn, requesting that this court review its opinion
filed on December 29, 2008, the opposition filed by
Respondent /Plaintiff-appellee Bank of Hawai'i on January 26,
2009, and the record herein,

IT 18 HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for
reconsideration denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, February 17, 2009.

Gary Victor Dubin,

Long #. Vu, and

Frederick J. Arensmeyer

(Dubin Law Offices) ,

on the motion A eel

for petitioner/defendant-

appellant. Yous Duchy

Mark T. Shklov,
Michel A. Okazaki, and
Peter Van Name Esser,

on the opposition

for respondent /plaintift—
appellee.

 

Having filed a concurring and dissenting opinion, T
respectfully dissent and would grant the motion for
reconsideration.

Prada Coa ey nee
Slat hLacrnae—