One of the hottest issues in Hawaii at the moment is agriculture. From the spreading county restrictions on GMO crops and pesticides, to water issues, to estate planning, the issues impacting farmers, ranchers, and owners of Ag land are growing.
On January 8 and 9, 2014, the Seminar Group is putting on what we hope
We’re offline today because we’re arguing a case in the Hawaii Supreme Court about automatic approval statutes and zoning law. Here’s the summary of the issues, via the Judiciary web site:
This appeal arises out of a decision by the Respondent Planning Commission of the County of Kaua`i (Planning Commission) to deny the Petitioner Kauai
Today, the Hawaii Supreme Court rejected certiorari (remember that under our procedures, you “apply” for cert which is “accepted” or “rejected”), and declined to review the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ decision in In re Campbell, No. 30006 (June 13, 2013), the case involving Land Court registration (Torrens title) and mineral and metallic mining rights.
Here’s the State’s Reply Brief supporting its application for cert and responding to the landowner’s BIO in the land court registration case, In re Campbell. The brief argues that “[t]his is no minor land dispute,” and “that the State is very concerned about the ICA Opinion.”
What’s so important about the State’s claimed reservation
Here’s the Response to Application for Writ of Certiorari by the State of Hawaii, which opposes the State’s cert app asking the Hawaii Supreme Court to review for grave error the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ opinion in In re Trustees Under the Will of the Estate of James Campbell, No. 30006 (June 13
Here’s one we’ve been meaning to post for a while, if only because it presents a fascinating issue about the nature of Torrens title (so much so that we filed an amicus brief on behalf of Pacific Legal Foundation in the Intermediate Court of Appeals).
The State of Hawaii has filed an Application for a
Just over a month ago, the U.S Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that a federal takings case could actually proceed in federal court. Well yesterday, the same court issued a similar opinion in a related case, Town of Nags Head v. Toloczko, No. 12-1537 (Aug. 27, 2013).
We won’t go
This really was a “blockbuster” Term for the Supreme Court and takings law: no less than three cases (and four, maybe five, if you expand it slightly to include property-owner favorable cases such as Lozman and last term’s Sackett), and as Gideon Kanner noted recently, the CLE sessions are flying fast and furiously.
Here’s one not to miss, not only because it’s free, but because it features our PLF colleague Paul Beard II, arguing and prevailing counsel in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgm’t Dist., No. 11-1447 (June 25, 2013): on Wednesday, July 17, 2013, from 2:00 – 3:30 pm ET, Greenberg Traurig and
The Supreme Court has denied cert in Estate of Hage v. United States, No. 12-918 (cert. petition filed Jan. 17, 2013).
That’s the case in which the Federal Circuit held that a 22-year old takings case was not ripe because even though the agency denied Hage’s every application for a grazing permit, it