Chung v. City and County of Honolulu et al
| Nelson A. Chung |
| City and County of Honolulu, Pamela Okihara, Elizabeth Tsuruda, John Does 1-56, Jane Does 1-56, Doe Partnerships 1-56, Doe Corporations 1-56, Doe Entities 1-56 and Doe Governmental Units 1-56 |
| 1:2014cv00314 |
| July 9, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Hawaii Office |
| Honolulu |
| BARRY M. KURREN |
| DERRICK K. WATSON |
| Employment |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
68
ORDER DENYING 59 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 5/5/2016. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
54
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' 34 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 1/26/2016. -- The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
