The County of Hawaii Planning Department has issued Memorandum No. 07-20 (Oct. 3, 2007) setting forth the County’s reevaluated practices in reviewing development applications “to see whether an environmental assessment is needed under Chap. 343 [the Hawaii Environmental Policy Act.]” The bottom line is set forth on page 2:
Planners will have to review the…
In UFO Chuting of Hawaii, Inc. v. Smith, No 05-16545 (Nov. 28, 2007), the Ninth Circuit held:
We hold that UFO’s right to operate vessels under its federal maritime coasting licenses does not preempt Hawaii law prohibiting parasailing off the coast of Maui during limited portions of the year to protect mating humpback whales.…
I sat in on today’s oral arguments in the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals (the nondiscretionary appeals court of first resort) in an interesting case, Ohana Pale Ke Ao v. Bd. of Agriculture, State of Hawaii, No. 27855. From the arguments and a quick review of the briefs, the primary issue in the case…
Ahoy! Are you curious about the difference between a Letter of Marque and a Letter of Reprisal? Between a “pirate” and a “privateer?” Want to find out more about maritime security?
If so, then I have just the place where you can find out about those topics, and more: my Damon Key colleague Mark Murakami…
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
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…
The question of “which came first, the Environmental Assessment exemption or the challenge?” is providing an interesting illustration of the metaphysical issue of what is the impact of a government act subsequently ruled to be illegal.
In denying the plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order, the Fifth Circuit court did not rule on…
Charley Foster at Planet Kauai has been out in front of the old media in reporting on the Kauai front of the Superferry conflict. He reports that the Fifth Circuit Court has denied the motion for a temporary restraining order. He has posted the order in jpg format, and kindly forwarded the pdf version, which…
More on the Supreme Court of Hawaii opinion in Brescia v. North Shore Ohana (No. 27211, July 12, 2007). The Court took up no less than seven points on appeal, but the most interesting to me was the analysis of the estoppel issue.
The case involved Kauai property within the coastal “Special Management Area.” The…
The Hawaii Supreme Court has issued an opinion in Brescia v. North Shore Ohana (No. 27211, July 12, 2007), a case discussing shoreline setbacks, due process, and vested rights. I haven’t had a chance to read the majority opinion authored by Justice Acoba, or the concurring opinion by Justice Levinson, but will post more after…
