Summary
holding that HLRB's original jurisdiction over prohibited practice claims is mandatory
Summary of this case from In re United Pub. WorkersOpinion
No. 29410.
June 24, 2010.
Memorandum Opinions Vacated remanded.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
United Public Workers v. Watada
Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawaii
Jun 24, 2010
233 P.3d 719 (Haw. Ct. App. 2010)
Summaries of
United Public Workers v. Watada
Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawaii
Jun 24, 2010
233 P.3d 719 (Haw. Ct. App. 2010)
holding that HLRB's original jurisdiction over prohibited practice claims is mandatory
Summary of this case from In re United Pub. Workersholding that HLRB's original jurisdiction over prohibited practice claims is mandatory
Summary of this case from In re United Pub. WorkersCase details for
United Public Workers v. Watada
Case Details
Full title:United Public Workers, AFSCME, Local 646. AFL-CIO v. Watada
Court:Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawaii
Date published: Jun 24, 2010
Citations
233 P.3d 719 (Haw. Ct. App. 2010)
123 Haw. 299
Citing Cases
In re United Pub. Workers
The HLRB has jurisdiction to interpret and apply HRS § 89–13(a)(1) through a declaratory ruling to determine…
In re United Pub. WorkersThe HLRB has jurisdiction to interpret and apply HRS § 89–13(a)(1) through a declaratory ruling to determine…