Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 Hawaii opinions name it 1 courts 1997–2024 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Hawaii courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Akaka v. Yoshinagreen2 sentences2022See Tataii v. Cronin, 119 Hawai#i 337, 339, 198 P.3d 124, 126 (2008) (“A complaint challenging the results of [a general] election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election.” (Quoting Akaka v. Yoshina, 84 Hawai#i 383, 387, 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997))); Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 316 , 651 P.2d 912, 914 (1982) (“By the omission of language providing for the invalidation of an election and the allowance of a new election in HRS § 11–173.5(b), the legislature clearly intended that the only remedy that c 2022See Tataii v. Cronin, 119 Hawai#i 337, 339, 198 P.3d 124, 126 (2008) (“A complaint challenging the results of [a general] election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election.” (Quoting Akaka v. Yoshina, 84 Hawai#i 383, 387, 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997))); Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 316 , 651 P.2d 912, 914 (1982) (“By the omission of language providing for the invalidation of an election and the allowance of a new election in HRS § 11–173.5(b), the legislature clearly intended that the only remedy that c | 11 | 11 |
Tataii v. Croningreen2 sentences2022See Tataii v. Cronin, 119 Hawai#i 337, 339, 198 P.3d 124, 126 (2008) (“A complaint challenging the results of [a general] election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election.” (Quoting Akaka v. Yoshina, 84 Hawai#i 383, 387, 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997))); Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 316 , 651 P.2d 912, 914 (1982) (“By the omission of language providing for the invalidation of an election and the allowance of a new election in HRS § 11–173.5(b), the legislature clearly intended that the only remedy that c 2022See Tataii v. Cronin, 119 Hawai#i 337, 339, 198 P.3d 124, 126 (2008) (“A complaint challenging the results of [a general] election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election.” (Quoting Akaka v. Yoshina, 84 Hawai#i 383, 387, 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997))); Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 316 , 651 P.2d 912, 914 (1982) (“By the omission of language providing for the invalidation of an election and the allowance of a new election in HRS § 11–173.5(b), the legislature clearly intended that the only remedy that c | 10 | 11 |
Funakoshi v. Kinggreen2 sentences2022See Tataii v. Cronin, 119 Hawai#i 337, 339, 198 P.3d 124, 126 (2008) (“A complaint challenging the results of [a general] election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election.” (Quoting Akaka v. Yoshina, 84 Hawai#i 383, 387, 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997))); Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 316 , 651 P.2d 912, 914 (1982) (“By the omission of language providing for the invalidation of an election and the allowance of a new election in HRS § 11–173.5(b), the legislature clearly intended that the only remedy that c 2022See Tataii v. Cronin, 119 Hawai#i 337, 339, 198 P.3d 124, 126 (2008) (“A complaint challenging the results of [a general] election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election.” (Quoting Akaka v. Yoshina, 84 Hawai#i 383, 387, 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997))); Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 316 , 651 P.2d 912, 914 (1982) (“By the omission of language providing for the invalidation of an election and the allowance of a new election in HRS § 11–173.5(b), the legislature clearly intended that the only remedy that c | 9 | 9 |
Elkins v. Ariyoshigreen2 sentences2008“A complaint challenging the results of [a general] election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election[.]” Akaka v. Yoshina, 84 Hawai'i 383, 387 , 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997) (citing Elkins v. Ariyoshi, 56 Haw. 47, 48 , 527 P.2d 236, 237 (1974) and Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 317 , 651 P.2d 912, 915 (1982) (“‘Difference in the election results’ in [HRS § 11-172] mean[s] a difference sufficient to overturn the nomination of any particular candidate or candidates in the primary.”)). [T]he [plaintiff] mus 2008“A complaint challenging the results of [a general] election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election[.]” Akaka v. Yoshina, 84 Hawai'i 383, 387 , 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997) (citing Elkins v. Ariyoshi, 56 Haw. 47, 48 , 527 P.2d 236, 237 (1974) and Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 317 , 651 P.2d 912, 915 (1982) (“‘Difference in the election results’ in [HRS § 11-172] mean[s] a difference sufficient to overturn the nomination of any particular candidate or candidates in the primary.”)). [T]he [plaintiff] mus | 4 | 4 |
Lewis v. Cayetanogreen2 sentences2004In reviewing the plaintiffs claims, the Akaka court observed: We have held that a complaint challenging the results of an election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a-claim unless: (1) the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election, Elkins v. Ariyoshi, 56 Haw. 47, 48 , 527 P.2d 236, 237 (1974) (per curiam); Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 314 , 651 P.2d 912, 913 (1982) (per curiam); Lewis v. Cayetano, 72 Haw. 499, 504 , 823 P.2d 738, 741 (1992); or (2) the plaintiffs demonstrate that the correct result cannot be ascertained because of a mistake or fraud o 2004In reviewing the plaintiffs claims, the Akaka court observed: We have held that a complaint challenging the results of an election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a-claim unless: (1) the plaintiffs demonstrate errors that would change the outcome of the election, Elkins v. Ariyoshi, 56 Haw. 47, 48 , 527 P.2d 236, 237 (1974) (per curiam); Funakoshi v. King, 65 Haw. 312, 314 , 651 P.2d 912, 913 (1982) (per curiam); Lewis v. Cayetano, 72 Haw. 499, 504 , 823 P.2d 738, 741 (1992); or (2) the plaintiffs demonstrate that the correct result cannot be ascertained because of a mistake or fraud o | 2 | 2 |
Bank of America, N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo.red1 sentence2022Akaka, 84 Hawaiʻi at 387, 935 P.2d at 102 ; see HRS § 11-174.5(b) (2009 & Supp. 2021). 5. “[A] complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Bank of Am., N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo, 143 Hawaiʻi 249, 258, 428 P.3d 761, 770 (2018) (citation omitted). 6. | 1 | 1 |
Watland v. Linglegreen2 sentences2004See Watland, Op. at 134, 85 P.3d at 1085 ("This is not a typical election contest wherein a complainant challenges the results of an election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 (1993)." (Emphasis added.)); Watland , Op. at 137, 85 P.3d at 1088 (repeating that the instant case "is not a typical election contest customarily governed by HRS § 11-172" (emphasis added)). 2004See Watland, Op. at 134, 85 P.3d at 1085 ("This is not a typical election contest wherein a complainant challenges the results of an election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 (1993)." (Emphasis added.)); Watland , Op. at 137, 85 P.3d at 1088 (repeating that the instant case "is not a typical election contest customarily governed by HRS § 11-172" (emphasis added)). | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Iaukeagreen1 sentence1997HRS § 11—174.5(b). *388 Under the first circumstance, “the petitioner must ‘show that he [or she] ha[s] actual information of mistakes or errors sufficient to change the result.’ ” Funakoshi, 65 Haw. at 316-17 , 651 P.2d at 915 (quoting Brown v. Iaukea, 18 Haw. 131, 133 (1906)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Tax Foundation of Hawaiʻi v. State.
green
1 sentence2024In opposition, citing to HRS § 11-172 and Tax Found. of Hawaiʻi v. State, 144 Hawaiʻi 175, 439 P.3d 127 (2019), Defendants argued that Plaintiff, as a nonpartisan candidate for the Mayor’s race in the City and County of Honolulu, has no standing to challenge all statewide ballots, and only has standing to bring an election contest in the race where he is a candidate. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Kahalekai v. Doi
green
2 sentences2004Unlike Akaka , this is not a typical election contest wherein a complainant challenges the results of an election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 (1993). 10 Rather, the na ture of this ease is more analogous to Kaha-lekai where, as here, the plaintiffs contested the validity of certain constitutional amendments on the ground that the amendments were not submitted to the electorate in the form and manner required by law. 11 60 Haw. at 326 , 590 P.2d at 546 . 2004Unlike Akaka , this is not a typical election contest wherein a complainant challenges the results of an election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 (1993). 10 Rather, the na ture of this ease is more analogous to Kaha-lekai where, as here, the plaintiffs contested the validity of certain constitutional amendments on the ground that the amendments were not submitted to the electorate in the form and manner required by law. 11 60 Haw. at 326 , 590 P.2d at 546 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.