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.
6 Hawaii opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Fasi v. State of Hawaii Public Employment Relations Boardgreen2 sentences2015See Citizens Against Reckless Dev. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 114 Hawai'i 184, 196-97 , 159 P.3d 143, 155-56 (2007) (“[T]he declaratory ruling procedure of HRS § 91-8 is meant to provide a means of seeking a determination of whether and in what way some statute, agency rule, or order, applies to the factual situation raised by an interested person.” (emphasis in original)); Fasi v. State Public Emp’t Relations Bd., 60 Haw. 436, 444 , 591 P.2d 113, 118 (1979) (“[HRS § 91-8] is designed to provide a means for securing from an agency its interpretation of relevant statutes, rules and orders.... 2015See Citizens Against Reckless Dev. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 114 Hawai'i 184, 196-97 , 159 P.3d 143, 155-56 (2007) (“[T]he declaratory ruling procedure of HRS § 91-8 is meant to provide a means of seeking a determination of whether and in what way some statute, agency rule, or order, applies to the factual situation raised by an interested person.” (emphasis in original)); Fasi v. State Public Emp’t Relations Bd., 60 Haw. 436, 444 , 591 P.2d 113, 118 (1979) (“[HRS § 91-8] is designed to provide a means for securing from an agency its interpretation of relevant statutes, rules and orders.... | 5 | 5 |
Lingle v. Hawai'i Government Employees Ass'n, AFSCME, Local 152green2 sentences2015Ass’n, 107 Hawai'i 178, 186 , 111 P.3d 587, 595 (2005) (“[W]e hold that orders disposing of petitions for declaratory *398 rulings under HRS § 91-8 are appealable to the circuit court pursuant to HRS § 91-14.”); see also AlohaCare, 126 Hawai'i at 342 , 271 P.3d at 637 (declining to reach the issue of whether an “interested person” who petitions for a declaratory ruling under HRS § 91-8 is necessarily a “person aggrieved” pursuant to HRS § 91-14, but holding that in the given case, the petitioner was a “person aggrieved”). 2015Ass’n, 107 Hawai'i 178, 186 , 111 P.3d 587, 595 (2005) (“[W]e hold that orders disposing of petitions for declaratory *398 rulings under HRS § 91-8 are appealable to the circuit court pursuant to HRS § 91-14.”); see also AlohaCare, 126 Hawai'i at 342 , 271 P.3d at 637 (declining to reach the issue of whether an “interested person” who petitions for a declaratory ruling under HRS § 91-8 is necessarily a “person aggrieved” pursuant to HRS § 91-14, but holding that in the given case, the petitioner was a “person aggrieved”). | 2 | 2 |
Vail v. Employees' Retirement System of Hawai'igreen2 sentences2005Sys., 75 Haw. 42, 49-51 , 856 P.2d 1227, 1232-33 (1993) (entertaining an appeal, brought pursuant to HRS § 91-14, of an HRS § 91-8 declaratory order); Fasi v. State Pub. 2005Sys., 75 Haw. 42, 49-51 , 856 P.2d 1227, 1232-33 (1993) (entertaining an appeal, brought pursuant to HRS § 91-14, of an HRS § 91-8 declaratory order); Fasi v. State Pub. | 1 | 2 |
In re: The Petition of Ku'ulei Higashi Kanahele and Ahiena Kanahele.green2 sentences2025As relevant here, HRS § 91-14(g) provides the LUC’s findings of fact in a declaratory order will be affirmed unless they are “[c]learly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record.” See HRS § 91-14(g)(5); Rosehill, 155 Hawaiʻi at 50, 556 P.3d at 96 (quoting In re Kanahele, 152 Hawaiʻi at 510, 526 P.3d at 487 ). (continued . . .) (3) Proceedings for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules under sections 91-3 and 205-7, HRS; (4) Petitions for declaratory orders under section 91-8, HRS; (5) An investigation or review instituted or requested to be 2025As relevant here, HRS § 91-14(g) provides the LUC’s findings of fact in a declaratory order will be affirmed unless they are “[c]learly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record.” See HRS § 91-14(g)(5); Rosehill, 155 Hawaiʻi at 50, 556 P.3d at 96 (quoting In re Kanahele, 152 Hawaiʻi at 510, 526 P.3d at 487). (continued . . .) (3) Proceedings for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules under sections 91-3 and 205-7, HRS; (4) Petitions for declaratory orders under section 91-8, HRS; (5) An investigation or review instituted or requested to be | 1 | 1 |
Card v. ZONING BD. OF HONOLULUgreen1 sentence2015See Citizens Against Reckless Dev. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 114 Hawai'i 184, 196-97 , 159 P.3d 143, 155-56 (2007) (“[T]he declaratory ruling procedure of HRS § 91-8 is meant to provide a means of seeking a determination of whether and in what way some statute, agency rule, or order, applies to the factual situation raised by an interested person.” (emphasis in original)); Fasi v. State Public Emp’t Relations Bd., 60 Haw. 436, 444 , 591 P.2d 113, 118 (1979) (“[HRS § 91-8] is designed to provide a means for securing from an agency its interpretation of relevant statutes, rules and orders.... | 1 | 1 |
AlohaCare v. Itogreen2 sentences2015Ass’n, 107 Hawai'i 178, 186 , 111 P.3d 587, 595 (2005) (“[W]e hold that orders disposing of petitions for declaratory *398 rulings under HRS § 91-8 are appealable to the circuit court pursuant to HRS § 91-14.”); see also AlohaCare, 126 Hawai'i at 342 , 271 P.3d at 637 (declining to reach the issue of whether an “interested person” who petitions for a declaratory ruling under HRS § 91-8 is necessarily a “person aggrieved” pursuant to HRS § 91-14, but holding that in the given case, the petitioner was a “person aggrieved”). 2015Ass’n, 107 Hawai'i 178, 186 , 111 P.3d 587, 595 (2005) (“[W]e hold that orders disposing of petitions for declaratory *398 rulings under HRS § 91-8 are appealable to the circuit court pursuant to HRS § 91-14.”); see also AlohaCare, 126 Hawai'i at 342 , 271 P.3d at 637 (declining to reach the issue of whether an “interested person” who petitions for a declaratory ruling under HRS § 91-8 is necessarily a “person aggrieved” pursuant to HRS § 91-14, but holding that in the given case, the petitioner was a “person aggrieved”). | 1 | 1 |
Citizens Against Reckless Development v. Zoning Board of Appealsgreen1 sentence2015See Citizens Against Reckless Dev. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 114 Hawai'i 184, 196-97 , 159 P.3d 143, 155-56 (2007) (“[T]he declaratory ruling procedure of HRS § 91-8 is meant to provide a means of seeking a determination of whether and in what way some statute, agency rule, or order, applies to the factual situation raised by an interested person.” (emphasis in original)); Fasi v. State Public Emp’t Relations Bd., 60 Haw. 436, 444 , 591 P.2d 113, 118 (1979) (“[HRS § 91-8] is designed to provide a means for securing from an agency its interpretation of relevant statutes, rules and orders.... | 1 | 1 |
Kim v. Employees' Retirement Systemgreen2 sentences2012Lingle , 107 Hawai`i at 185-86, 111 P.3d at 594-95 ; Vail, 75 Haw. at 47-59 , 856 P.2d at 1231-37 ; see Kim , 89 Hawai`i at 71-73, 968 P.2d at 1081-84 . 2012Lingle, 107 Hawai'i at 185-86 , 111 P.3d at 594-95 ; Vail, 75 Haw. at 47-59 , 856 P.2d at 1231-37 ; see Kim, 89 Hawai'i at 71-73 , 968 P.2d at 1081-84 . | 1 | 1 |
Sierra Club v. Hawaii Tourism Authoritygreen2 sentences2005Employment Relations Bd., 60 Haw. 436, 437-43 , 591 P.2d, 113, 114-16 (1979) (noting that the “circuit court acquired jurisdiction [over a declaratory ruling] ... pursuant to HRS § 91-14”); see also Sierra Club v. Hawai'i Tourism Auth., 100 Hawai'i 242, 264 , 59 P.3d 877, 899 (2002) (explaining that HAPA “applies only to judicial review of contested case hearings, see HRS § 91-14, or ... a declaratory order from an agency regarding the ‘applicability of any statutory provision or of any rule or order of the agency,’ HRS § 91-8”). 2005Employment Relations Bd., 60 Haw. 436, 437-43 , 591 P.2d, 113, 114-16 (1979) (noting that the “circuit court acquired jurisdiction [over a declaratory ruling] ... pursuant to HRS § 91-14”); see also Sierra Club v. Hawai'i Tourism Auth., 100 Hawai'i 242, 264 , 59 P.3d 877, 899 (2002) (explaining that HAPA “applies only to judicial review of contested case hearings, see HRS § 91-14, or ... a declaratory order from an agency regarding the ‘applicability of any statutory provision or of any rule or order of the agency,’ HRS § 91-8”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rosehill v. State of Hawai'i.
green
2 sentences2025As relevant here, HRS § 91-14(g) provides the LUC’s findings of fact in a declaratory order will be affirmed unless they are “[c]learly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record.” See HRS § 91-14(g)(5); Rosehill, 155 Hawaiʻi at 50, 556 P.3d at 96 (quoting In re Kanahele, 152 Hawaiʻi at 510, 526 P.3d at 487 ). (continued . . .) (3) Proceedings for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules under sections 91-3 and 205-7, HRS; (4) Petitions for declaratory orders under section 91-8, HRS; (5) An investigation or review instituted or requested to be 2025As relevant here, HRS § 91-14(g) provides the LUC’s findings of fact in a declaratory order will be affirmed unless they are “[c]learly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record.” See HRS § 91-14(g)(5); Rosehill, 155 Hawaiʻi at 50, 556 P.3d at 96 (quoting In re Kanahele, 152 Hawaiʻi at 510, 526 P.3d at 487). (continued . . .) (3) Proceedings for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules under sections 91-3 and 205-7, HRS; (4) Petitions for declaratory orders under section 91-8, HRS; (5) An investigation or review instituted or requested to be | 1 | 2025–2025 |
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.