September 2007

When does a person or organization have enough legal interest in an issue such that it can be a plaintiff in lawsuit?  Are there any systematic checks in place to keep the courts from being co-opted for political ends?  These were key issues raised by the Hawaii Supreme Court’s opinion in the “Hawaii Superferry EIS case,” Sierra Club v. State of Hawaii Dep’t of Trans., No. 27407 (Aug. 31, 2007).  This post looks at the procedural issue of “standing,” an issue that took up a majority of the court’s 104-page opinion. 

An earlier post focuses on the substantive issue of whether the State DOT erred when it determined that improvements to Maui’sKahului Harbor necessary to the Superferry’s Maui operation were within the categorical administrative exemptions tothe Hawaii Environmental Policy Act, Haw. Rev. Stat. ch. 343,and therefore no Environmental Assessment was necessary.Continue Reading ▪ Superferry EIS Case Summary pt. II: Throwing Open The Barn Door After the Horses Have Been Let Out

The Maui Vacation Rental Association has sued the County of Maui, the county Planning Director, and the Department of Planning in federal court in Honolulu for constitutional and other violations, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.  The complaint summarizes the claims:

This is an action for injunctive and declaratory relief against defendants, and each of them…

You can read the court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order here.

I won’t be commenting on this decision since my colleagues Ken Kupchak, Mark Murakami and I are the attorneys for the property owner, but the statement of the family that owns the land is below.

# # # #

Circuit…

New Jersey Eminent Domain Blog posts “Eminent Domain, Fifth Amendment Property Rights, and Government Retaliation” about last Term’s US Supreme Court decision in Wilkie v. Robbins:

But what makes Wilkie particularly troubling is the clearpattern of harassment against Robbins by the BLM over the course offive years. While the alleged violations by…

The “Daily Dish” blog at the Honolulu Advertiser poses an intriguing question: “Should anyone own the beach?”  The issue, however, isn’t about beach ownership, but rather restriction of access to publicly-owned beaches via private roads:

This past August a group of homeowners in Kailua installed a 6-foottall gate — with a combination…

Thanks to Professor Gideon Kanner at Gideon’s Trumpet for pointing out a recent important eminent domain case from the Court of Appeals of Washington (state), HTK Mgm’t, L.L.C. v. Rokan Partners, No. 58113-9-I (Wash. Ct. App., July 23, 2007).  The court summarized the case:

The power of eminent domain is an inherent power of…

What purpose is served by the Legislature providing for an environmental assessment “exemption” if there are always exceptions to the exemption? 

That is the question raised by the Hawaii Supreme Court’s opinion in the “Hawaii Superferry EIS case,” Sierra Club v. State of Hawaii Dep’t of Trans., No. 27407 (Aug. 31, 2007).

This…

In a case that illustrates the lengths a court will go to avoid dealing with the merits of a takings challenge, the Ninth Circuit in Equities Lifestyle Prop., Inc., v. County of San Luis Obispo (No. 05-55406) (Sep. 17, 2007), held that the plaintiff was both too early (not yet ripe under Williamson County)…

There’s an interesting discussion going on over at Professor Patty Salkin’s Law of the Land blog about a recent Ohio appeals court decision applying Lingle v. Chevron USA, 544 U.S. 528 (2005). 

Lingle didn’t get rid of the “substantially advance” test, it merelyrelocated it to due process, and reminded us that in thosecircumstances where…