The City and County of Honolulu has filed a petition for writ of certiorari in Matsuda v. City and County of Honolulu, No. 06-15337 (9th Cir. Jan. 14, 2008), asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. We don’t have a copy of the cert petition yet, but when we do, we’ll post it. The Supreme Court docket report is here (No. 07-1305).
Matsuda involved th repeal of “chapter 38,” Honolulu’s version of the Hawaii Land Reform Act at issue in Hawaii Housing Auth. v. Midkiff,467 U.S. 229 (1984). Chapter 38 allowed for conversion of condominium interests to fee simple, via a condemnation process.
In Matsuda, apartment owners applied to the city to “convert” (condemn) theirapartment leases, and entered into written contracts with the city, in which the apartment owners each agreed to pay the city $1,000, in return for whichthe city promised that after its acquisition of the lease, it wouldconvey it to the apartment owner. The owners subsequently received thecity’s approvals, but final approval by the City Council was withheldbecause the council was already considering repealing chapter 38, which it did in 2005.
Theordinance repealing chapter 38 eventually contained a provisionallowing any conversion proceeding which has been approved by the CityCouncil to be completed, but because Matsuda’s had not received final councilapproval, the taking was denied. Matsuda and others filed suit against the city in federal court,alleging that the repeal of chapter 38 was a violation of the U.S.Constitution’s Contracts Clause. The Ninth Circuit held that the district court should have viewed the repeal of Chapter 38 with “heightened scrutiny” because therepeal of Chapter 38 was the city voiding its own contracts. A complete summary of the Ninth Circuit’s opinion is posted here.
Tim Sandefur added his thoughts about Matsuda here, and Professor Gideon Kanner’s are posted here. More to follow when we receive a copy of the cert petition.