Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Lord v. Lord

5 Citing cases

  1. Cooke Trust Co. v. Lord

    41 Haw. 198 (Haw. 1955)   Cited 8 times
    In Cooke Trust, supra, the Hawaii Supreme Court held that when, as in this case, the trustee has the absolute discretion to pay income to either the settlor of the trust or to others, the entire trust corpus may be reached by the settlor's creditors.

    (Emphasis added.) The case of Lord v. Lord, 35 Haw. 26, is cited as contrary to the numerous decisions that a trustor with the consent of the beneficiaries may revoke the trust. This case is where the settlor created a trust chiefly to provide alimony for his divorced wife.

  2. Munoz v. Ashford

    40 Haw. 675 (Haw. 1955)   Cited 19 times

    "It is a maxim that equity regards the substance rather than the form." ( Lord v. Lord, 35 Haw. 26, 39.) Hence, "* * * whether a suit is one against a State is to be determined, not by the fact of the party named as a defendant on the record, but by the result of the judgment or decree which may be entered * * *." ( Minnesota v. Hitchcock, 185 U.S. 373, 387).

  3. Rand v. Rand

    137 Haw. 206 (Haw. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 3 times

    HRS § 571–3 (2006). “[E]quity regards the substance rather than the form.... Equity goes behind the form of the transaction in order to give effect to the intention of the parties....” Schrader v.Benton, 2 Haw.App. 564, 566, 635 P.2d 562, 564 (1981) (quoting Lord v. Lord, 35 Haw. 26, 39 (Haw.Terr.1939)) (internal quotation marks omitted). The promissory notes were part of an overall structure intended to pay Joel the entire amount of the Retention and Longevity Bonuses up front while ensuring that he would not have to pay taxes on those lump sums.

  4. Schrader v. Benton

    635 P.2d 562 (Haw. Ct. App. 1981)   Cited 6 times
    Rejecting alternative form of specific performance that might deprive the parties of the full benefit of the substance or essence of their bargain

    Equity goes behind the form of the transaction in order to give effect to the intention of the parties. . . ." Lord v. Lord, 35 Haw. 26 (1939) at 39. Thus, "the court of equity has plenary power to mold its decrees in such form as to conserve the equities of all parties * * *."

  5. Linson v. Linson

    1 Haw. App. 272 (Haw. Ct. App. 1980)   Cited 33 times
    In Linson v. Linson, 1 Haw. App. 272, 278, 618 P.2d 748, 751 (1980), the ICA held "that the phrase `estate of the parties' as it is used in HRS § 580-47 means anything of present or prospective value, and therefore that a spouse's nonvested military retirement benefit constitutes part of the estate of the parties under HRS § 580-47."

    Equity regards substance rather than form. Lord v. Lord, 35 Haw. 26 (1939). Whether husband's relationship to prospective retirement benefits is called a "mere expectancy", and therefore not "property" as in French, or a "contractual right", and therefore "property" as in Brown, the fact is that 18 of the 20 years necessary to qualify for it were years in which the Linsons were partners in marriage.