In Aha Hui Malama O Kaniakapupu v. Land Use Comm’n, 111 Haw. 14, 139 P.3d 712 (July 24, 2006), the court set forth the standard for when an agency hearing is a “contested case” under the Hawaii Administrative Procedures Act (HAPA). The definition is critical because unless a contested case has been conducted by
2007
▪ 2006 Land Use in Review: Return to Sender – Elvis and Notice
By Robert H. Thomas on
Posted in Property rights
I gave a letter to the postman,
he put it his sack.
Bright and early next morning,
he brought my letter back.
In Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. ___ (Apr. 26, 2006), the U.S. Supreme Court answered the question of what further obligation the government has to provide a property owner notice of an…
▪ 2006 Land Use in Review: Clean Water Act Jurisdiction
By Robert H. Thomas on
Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. ___ (Jun 19, 2006) was this year’s big environmental case from the U.S. Supreme Court, yet it did little to resolve the question over the geographic scope of “navigable waters” as used in the Clean Water Act. The CWA requires a property owner seek a permit from the…
▪ 2006 Land Use in Review: No Leg to Stand On
By Robert H. Thomas on
In Keahole Defense Coalition, Inc. v. Bd. of Land and Nat. Res., 110 Haw. 419, 134 P.3d 585 (May 18, 2006), the Hawaii Supreme Court elaborated on the issue of when a party has “property” within the meaning of the due process clause of the Hawaii Constitution.
The twisted procedural history of the case…
▪ Give Me Money, or Else I Will Take Your Property
By Robert H. Thomas on
Posted in Property rights
More on Didden v. Port Chester, a case involving a demand for money in exchange for not exercising eminent domain, here:
Bart Didden wanted to put a CVS pharmacy on hisproperty in Port Chester, N.Y. He even obtained approvals from thelocal planning board.
But because a portion of the CVS site was in …