Once again we round-up the stats for the Hawaii appellate courts for the previous month.
In the month of February 2013, 84 opinions and orders were issued by the courts, down from 92 in January. The following is a break-down of how the numbers fell:
|
|
Hawaii Supreme Court |
Intermediate Court of Appeals |
|
Opinions |
1 |
2 |
|
Memorandum Opinions |
1 |
5 |
|
Summary Disposition Orders |
30 |
|
|
Orders Granting Reconsideration |
||
|
Orders Denying Reconsideration |
4 |
2 |
|
Dismissal Orders – Lack of Jurisdiction |
2 |
|
|
Dismissal Orders – HRAP 30 |
|
4 |
|
Dismissal Orders - Other |
6 |
|
|
Misc. Orders |
6 |
2 |
|
Writs of Cert Accepted |
3 |
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX |
|
Writs of Cert Rejected |
9 + 1 vacated |
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX |
|
Mandamus Grants |
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX |
|
|
Mandamus Denials |
6 |
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX |
|
FOF/COL/Judgment |
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX |
HAWSCT judges issuing separate opinions this month:
Justice Acoba issued an amended dissenting opinion from an rejecting cert in State v. Simon here.
Justice Pollack issued a Concurrence in Result Recommended by the Dissent in State v. Simon.
ICA judges issuing separate opinions this month:
Chief Judge Nakamura issued a concurring and dissenting opinion in State v. Haw. Gov’t Employees Ass’n AFSCME Local No. 152, AFL-CIO here, a dissenting opinion in State v. Lockey here, and a dissenting opinion in Nakajima v. Nakajima, an order dismissing appeal, here.
* * * *
A few observations about this month’s stats:
(1) Denials of writs of habeas corpus are not tracked separately, but the HAWSCT denied 2 (one is counted above as a denial of mandamus because the same order denied both habeas corpus and mandamus relief);
(2) Other than one denial of habeas corpus relief, the remaining “miscellaneous” orders issued by the HAWSCT were in attorney disciplinary proceedings;
(3) The order vacating cert issued by the HAWSCT is counted as such above, but it is an order vacating one of two orders rejecting cert;
(4) TIME TO DISPOSITION:
For ICA opinions, we track the time from the date the merit panel is assigned. For HAWSCT opinions, we track the time from the date a cert application (or application to transfer or other direct appeal) is filed. The time to disposition for transfer application to the HAWSCT is generally longer than for cert applications because the parties must brief the case (if the briefing has not already been submitted to the ICA prior to transfer). For a more detailed explanation on time to disposition visit our post on the topic here.
HAWSCT Opinions
State v. Spearman
Cert Application = 9/24/2012
Disposition = 2/21/2013
Total time = 5 months
ICA Opinions
Lahaina Fashions, Inc. v. Bank of Hawaii
Notice of Appeal = 8/5/2010
Merit Panel = 7/15/11 (subst 2/6/12)
Disposition = 2/21/2013
Total time = 20 months
Perry v. Perez-Wendt
Notice of Appeal = 2/16/10
Merit Panel = 3/6/12 (subst 1/2/13)
Disposition = 2/8/2013
Total time = 11 months
Comments