Orso v. City and County of Honolulu, 5428
Decision Date | 03 October 1973 |
Docket Number | No. 5428,5428 |
Citation | 514 P.2d 859,55 Haw. 37 |
Parties | John Freeman ORSO, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, a municipal corporation, Defendant-Appellant, Cross Appellee. |
Court | Hawaii Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
It is improper for counsel of a party to an appeal to present to this court matters not in the appeal record, such as by attaching to the brief, as appendices thereto, affidavits regarding such matters or copies of documents relating to such matters. All such appendices and arguments in the brief based thereon will be stricken.
David C. Schutter, Honolulu, for plaintiff-appellee, for the motion.
Charles F. Marsland, Jr., Deputy Corp. Counsel, City and County of Honolulu, for defendant-appellant, contra.
Before RICHARDSON, C. J., MARUMOTO, ABE, and KOBAYASHI, JJ., and FUKUSHIMA, Circuit Judge, in place of LEVINSON, J., disqualified.
Plaintiff-appellee, cross-appellant John Freeman Orso moved to strike from the opening brief of defendant-appellant, cross-appellee City and County of Honolulu appendices and all references therein to matters allegedly contained in the final argument of counsel for plaintiff-appellee, cross-appellant, on the ground that they are totally outside the records and files in the above entitled matter.
The motion is hereby granted.
H.R.C.P., Rule 75(a) provides:
H.R.C.P., Rule 75(a) provides:
Rule 3(b)(5) of the rules of this court requires, inter alia, that opening briefs contain
These rules are clear. Matters outside the trial record, unless settled and approved by the trial court, pursuant to H.R.C.P., Rule 75(c), may neither be appended nor referred to in appellate brief.
3A Barron & Holtzoff, Federal Practice & Procedure § 1590 (Rules ed. 1958), states the general rule: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Bloss
...156, 158, 598 P.2d 168, 170-71, n. 1 (1979); Pickering v. State, 57 Haw. 405, 409, 557 P.2d 125, 128 (1976); Orso v. City & County, 55 Haw. 37, 38-39, 514 P.2d 859, 860 (1973). Accordingly, we disregard the Corporation Counsel's letter of June 2, 1981, and the attached affidavit of Barbara ......
-
State v. Apao
...the appellant had formulated the requisite intent to commit the crime of murder. Judgment affirmed. 1 In Orso v. City & County of Honolulu, 55 Haw. 37, 38, 514 P.2d 859, 860 (1973), we said: "3A Barron & Holtzoff, Federal Practice & Procedure § 1590 (Rules ed. 1958), states the general rule......
-
85 Hawai'i 61, Konno v. County of Hawai'i
...the material attached to the County's motion because that material is not part of the record on appeal. See Orso v. City & County of Honolulu, 55 Haw. 37, 514 P.2d 859 (1973); Hawai'i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 10(a). Therefore, the practical impact of the transition from private ope......
-
Citizens for Equit. & Resp. Gov't v. County
...Hawaii-county.com." Although the subsequent Jacobson testimony need not be considered by this court, see Orso v. City & County of Honolulu, 55 Haw. 37, 38, 514 P.2d 859, 860 (1973) ("[A] question involving evidence not in the record cannot be reviewed on appeal.") (citation omitted), in lig......