Kawamoto v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Company of Hawaii, Inc. et al
| Ross Kawamoto |
| Fireman's Fund Insurance Company of Hawaii, Inc., John Does 1-10, Jane Does 1-10, Doe Corporations 1-10, Doe Partnerships 1-10, Doe Non-Profit Organizations 1-10 and Doe Governmental Agencies 1-10 |
| 1:2012cv00109 |
| February 24, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Hawaii Office |
| Honolulu |
| KEVIN S.C. CHANG |
| ALAN C KAY |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 |
| Plaintiff |
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
63
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 38 . Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY on 03/21/2013. (eps) -- The Court DENIES AIC's motion for partial summary judgment. Kawamoto's tort claims are based on AIC's deni als or delays of benefit payments after October 19, 2009, and therefore are not barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The Court also finds that the DCD's May 11, 2011 finding is not entitled to preclusive effect in this litigation. Th ese findings are made WITHOUT PREJUDICE. " 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.
