Ching v. Case’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “for KRB to cultivate taro, and (b) award damages to KRB. With respect to KRB's request for injunctive relief, the Order After Trial states, in relevant part: 5. [KRB's] claim for injunctive relief is granted and the State is hereby ordered to comply with HRS § 46-11.5. 6. No later than October 5, 2021, the State must present this Court with a plan as to how it will come into compliance with HRS § 46-11.5. 10 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER An injunction is insufficient when the trial court fails to”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. KRB, LLC v. State

2. “by Section 203 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended, shall be held by the State as a public trust for native Hawaiians and the general public. Haw. Const. art. XII, § 4 (underline added); see Ching, 145 Hawai‘i at 176, 449 P.3d at 1174 (defining”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Frankel v. Board of Land and Natural Resources. Opinion by Hiraoka, J. Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part.

3. “[i]t is well settled that the determination of whether or not a particular proposed action, by the trustee of a charitable trust, would constitute a breach of that trust, is a matter to be determined by the courts, as part of their inherent jurisdiction.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Frankel v. Board of Land and Natural Resources. Opinion by Hiraoka, J. Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part.