fundamental principle in Hawaii

2012“We have long recognized that the Hawai'i Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional principle is to give effect to that intent.” Save *292 Sunset Beach Coalition v. Honolulu, 102 Hawai'i 465, 474 , 78 P.3d 1, 10 (2003), quoting Convention Center Auth. v. Anzai, 78 Hawai'i 157, 167 , 890 P.2d 1197, 1207 (1995).

2012“We have long recognized that the Hawai'i Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional principle is to give effect to that intent.” Save *292 Sunset Beach Coalition v. Honolulu, 102 Hawai'i 465, 474 , 78 P.3d 1, 10 (2003), quoting Convention Center Auth. v. Anzai, 78 Hawai'i 157, 167 , 890 P.2d 1197, 1207 (1995).

2025The court explained "that article XI, section 1 [(Natural Resources Trust)] and article XI, section 7 [(Water Resources Trust)] adopt the public trust doctrine as a fundamental principle of constitutional law in Hawai‘i." 9 Id. at 132, 160, 9 P.3d at 444, 472 (footnote omitted). 9 Article XI, section 7 of the Hawaiʻi Constitution provides as follows: ARTICLE XI . . . .

2025XI, § 7 (“The State has an obligation to protect, control and regulate the use of Hawaii’s water resources for the benefit of its people.”); In re Water Use Permit Applications, 94 Hawai‘i 97, 132, 9 P.3d 409, 444 (2000) (holding that article XI, section 1 and article XI, section 7 of the Hawai‘i Constitution “adopt the public trust doctrine as a fundamental principle of constitutional law in Hawai‘i”).

2010“This intent is to be found in the instrument itself.” State v. Kahlbaun, 64 Haw. 197, 201 , 638 P.2d 309, 314 (1981).

2010“This intent is to be found in the instrument itself.” State v. Kahlbaun, 64 Haw. 197, 201 , 638 P.2d 309, 314 (1981).

1986Its framers used "public" to modify both "officer" and "office." When resolving ambiguity, we have repeatedly held "that the fundamental principle in construing a constitutional provision is to give effect to the intention of the framers and the people adopting it." Huihui v. Shimoda, 64 Haw. 527, 531 , 644 P.2d 968, 971 (1982) (quoting State v. Miyasaki, 62 Haw. 269, 281 , 614 P.2d 915, 922 (1980), quoting HGEA v. County of Maui, 59 Haw. 65, 80-81 , 576 P.2d 1029, 1039 (1978)).

1986Its framers used "public" to modify both "officer" and "office." When resolving ambiguity, we have repeatedly held "that the fundamental principle in construing a constitutional provision is to give effect to the intention of the framers and the people adopting it." Huihui v. Shimoda, 64 Haw. 527, 531 , 644 P.2d 968, 971 (1982) (quoting State v. Miyasaki, 62 Haw. 269, 281 , 614 P.2d 915, 922 (1980), quoting HGEA v. County of Maui, 59 Haw. 65, 80-81 , 576 P.2d 1029, 1039 (1978)).

2014Furthermore, this court has “ ‘long recognized that the Hawai'i Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional principle is to give effect to that intent.’ ” Id. (quoting Save Sunset Beach Coal. v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 102 Hawai'i 465, 474 , 78 P.3d 1, 10 (2003) (other citation omitted)).

2014Furthermore, this court has “long recognized that the Hawai#i Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional principle is to give effect to that intent.’” Id. (quoting Save Sunset Beach Coal. v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 102 Hawai#i 465, 474, 78 P.3d 1, 10 (2003) (other citation omitted)).

2019"We have long recognized that the Hawai'i Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent." Hirono v. Peabody , 81 Hawai'i 230 , 232, 915 P.2d 704 , 706 (1996) (quoting Convention Ctr.

2019"We have long recognized that the Hawai'i Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent." Hirono v. Peabody , 81 Hawai'i 230 , 232, 915 P.2d 704 , 706 (1996) (quoting Convention Ctr.

2020"It is a fundamental principle that the intent of the settlor, as expressed in the trust instrument, shall prevail, 'unless inconsistent with some positive rule of law.'" In re Ishida- Waiakamilo Legacy Trust, 138 Hawai#i 98, 102-03, 377 P.3d 39 , 43- 44 (App. 2016) (quoting In re Lock, 109 Hawai#i at 151-52, 123 15 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER P.3d at 1246-47). "[I]n construing a trust document to determine the settlor's intent, the instrument must be read as a whole, not in fragments." Will of Damon, 76 Hawai#i at 124, 869 P.2d at 1343 (citing In re Lope

2020"It is a fundamental principle that the intent of the settlor, as expressed in the trust instrument, shall prevail, 'unless inconsistent with some positive rule of law.'" In re Ishida- Waiakamilo Legacy Trust, 138 Hawai#i 98, 102-03, 377 P.3d 39 , 43- 44 (App. 2016) (quoting In re Lock, 109 Hawai#i at 151-52, 123 15 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER P.3d at 1246-47). "[I]n construing a trust document to determine the settlor's intent, the instrument must be read as a whole, not in fragments." Will of Damon, 76 Hawai#i at 124, 869 P.2d at 1343 (citing In re Lope

2008Legal Duty “A fundamental requirement of a negligence action is the existence of a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff,” 31 Namauu v. City & County of Honolulu, 62 Haw. 358, 361 , 614 P.2d 943, 945 (1980) (citations omitted), that requires the defendant “to conform to a certain standard of conduct for the protection of others against unreasonable risks,” Birmingham v. Fodor’s Travel Publ’ns, Inc., 73 Haw. 359, 366, 833 P.2d 70, 74 (1992) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

2008Legal Duty “A fundamental requirement of a negligence action is the existence of a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff,” 31 Namauu v. City & County of Honolulu, 62 Haw. 358, 361 , 614 P.2d 943, 945 (1980) (citations omitted), that requires the defendant “to conform to a certain standard of conduct for the protection of others against unreasonable risks,” Birmingham v. Fodor’s Travel Publ’ns, Inc., 73 Haw. 359, 366, 833 P.2d 70, 74 (1992) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

2011Furthermore, in interpreting a constitutional provision, “this court ‘may look to the object sought to be established and the matters sought to be remedied along with the history of the times and state of being when the constitutional provision was adopted.’ ” Id. at 225, 140 P.3d at 1005 (quoting City & County of Honolulu v. Ariyoshi, 67 Haw. 412, 419 , 689 P.2d 757, 763 (1984) (citation omitted)).

2011Furthermore, in interpreting a constitutional provision, “this court ‘may look to the object sought to be established and the matters sought to be remedied along with the history of the times and state of being when the constitutional provision was adopted.’ ” Id. at 225, 140 P.3d at 1005 (quoting City & County of Honolulu v. Ariyoshi, 67 Haw. 412, 419 , 689 P.2d 757, 763 (1984) (citation omitted)).

2010See Sierra Club v. Dep’t of Transp. of State of Hawai'i, 120 Hawai'i 181, 196 , 202 P.3d 1226, 1241 (2009) (observing that this court has “long recognized that the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent” (quoting Hanabusa v. Lingle, 105 Hawai'i 28, 31-32 , 93 P.3d 670, 673-74 (2004))); Kaho‘ohanohano v. State, 114 Hawai'i 302, 342 , 162 P.3d 696 , 736 (2007) (construing the intent of article XVI, section 2 of the Hawai

2010See Sierra Club v. Dep’t of Transp. of State of Hawai'i, 120 Hawai'i 181, 196 , 202 P.3d 1226, 1241 (2009) (observing that this court has “long recognized that the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent” (quoting Hanabusa v. Lingle, 105 Hawai'i 28, 31-32 , 93 P.3d 670, 673-74 (2004))); Kaho‘ohanohano v. State, 114 Hawai'i 302, 342 , 162 P.3d 696 , 736 (2007) (construing the intent of article XVI, section 2 of the Hawai

2024This court construes the Hawaiʻi Constitution “with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, 26 *** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent.” Hanabusa v. Lingle, 105 Hawaiʻi 28, 31, 93 P.3d 670, 673 (2004).

2019And, as stated, "we have long recognized that the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent." Sierra Club v. Dep't of Transp. of Hawai'i , 120 Hawai'i 181 , 196, 202 P.3d 1226 , 1241 (2009) (quoting Hanabusa v. Lingle , 105 Hawai'i 28 , 31-32, 93 P.3d 670 , 673-74 (2004) ).

2011The Hawaii Supreme Court has long recognized that “ ‘the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional principle is to give effect to that intent.’ ” Save Sunset Beach Coal. v. City & County of Honolulu, 102 Hawai'i 465, 474 , 78 P.3d 1, 10 (2003) (quoting Convention Center Auth. v. Anzai, 78 Hawai'i 157, 167 , 890 P.2d 1197, 1207 (1995) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). “ ‘The general rule is that, if the words used in a constitutional provision ...

2011The Hawaii Supreme Court has long recognized that “ ‘the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional principle is to give effect to that intent.’ ” Save Sunset Beach Coal. v. City & County of Honolulu, 102 Hawai'i 465, 474 , 78 P.3d 1, 10 (2003) (quoting Convention Center Auth. v. Anzai, 78 Hawai'i 157, 167 , 890 P.2d 1197, 1207 (1995) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). “ ‘The general rule is that, if the words used in a constitutional provision ...

2011The Hawaii Supreme Court has long recognized that “ ‘the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional principle is to give effect to that intent.’ ” Save Sunset Beach Coal. v. City & County of Honolulu, 102 Hawai'i 465, 474 , 78 P.3d 1, 10 (2003) (quoting Convention Center Auth. v. Anzai, 78 Hawai'i 157, 167 , 890 P.2d 1197, 1207 (1995) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). “ ‘The general rule is that, if the words used in a constitutional provision ...

2011The Hawaii Supreme Court has long recognized that “ ‘the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional principle is to give effect to that intent.’ ” Save Sunset Beach Coal. v. City & County of Honolulu, 102 Hawai'i 465, 474 , 78 P.3d 1, 10 (2003) (quoting Convention Center Auth. v. Anzai, 78 Hawai'i 157, 167 , 890 P.2d 1197, 1207 (1995) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). “ ‘The general rule is that, if the words used in a constitutional provision ...

2020"It is a fundamental principle that the intent of the settlor, as expressed in the trust instrument, shall prevail, 'unless inconsistent with some positive rule of law.'" In re Ishida- Waiakamilo Legacy Trust, 138 Hawai#i 98, 102-03, 377 P.3d 39 , 43- 44 (App. 2016) (quoting In re Lock, 109 Hawai#i at 151-52, 123 15 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER P.3d at 1246-47). "[I]n construing a trust document to determine the settlor's intent, the instrument must be read as a whole, not in fragments." Will of Damon, 76 Hawai#i at 124, 869 P.2d at 1343 (citing In re Lope

2005"A fundamental rule when construing trusts is that the intention of the settlor as expressed *1247 in a trust instrument shall prevail unless inconsistent with some positive rule of law." Id. (internal brackets, quotation marks, and citation omitted).

1986Its framers used "public" to modify both "officer" and "office." When resolving ambiguity, we have repeatedly held "that the fundamental principle in construing a constitutional provision is to give effect to the intention of the framers and the people adopting it." Huihui v. Shimoda, 64 Haw. 527, 531 , 644 P.2d 968, 971 (1982) (quoting State v. Miyasaki, 62 Haw. 269, 281 , 614 P.2d 915, 922 (1980), quoting HGEA v. County of Maui, 59 Haw. 65, 80-81 , 576 P.2d 1029, 1039 (1978)).

1986Its framers used "public" to modify both "officer" and "office." When resolving ambiguity, we have repeatedly held "that the fundamental principle in construing a constitutional provision is to give effect to the intention of the framers and the people adopting it." Huihui v. Shimoda, 64 Haw. 527, 531 , 644 P.2d 968, 971 (1982) (quoting State v. Miyasaki, 62 Haw. 269, 281 , 614 P.2d 915, 922 (1980), quoting HGEA v. County of Maui, 59 Haw. 65, 80-81 , 576 P.2d 1029, 1039 (1978)).

1986See also First Insurance Co. of Hawaii, Ltd. v. International Harvester Co., 66 Haw. 185 , 659 P.2d 64 (1983); Ono v. Applegate, 62 Haw. 131 , 612 P.2d 533 (1980).

1986See also First Insurance Co. of Hawaii, Ltd. v. International Harvester Co., 66 Haw. 185 , 659 P.2d 64 (1983); Ono v. Applegate, 62 Haw. 131 , 612 P.2d 533 (1980).

2015The ICA’s analysis was in error The protections guaranteed in article I, section 7 of the Hawai'i Constitution “against unreasonable searches and seizures and invasions of privacy” are preserved by the fundamental principle in our law that warrantless searches are unreasonable per se, absent “a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions.” Garni, 81 Hawaii at 368 , 917 P.2d at 380 .

2015The ICA’s analysis was in error The protections guaranteed in article I, section 7 of the Hawai'i Constitution “against unreasonable searches and seizures and invasions of privacy” are preserved by the fundamental principle in our law that warrantless searches are unreasonable per se, absent “a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions.” Garni, 81 Hawaii at 368 , 917 P.2d at 380 .

2010See Sierra Club v. Dep’t of Transp. of State of Hawai'i, 120 Hawai'i 181, 196 , 202 P.3d 1226, 1241 (2009) (observing that this court has “long recognized that the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent” (quoting Hanabusa v. Lingle, 105 Hawai'i 28, 31-32 , 93 P.3d 670, 673-74 (2004))); Kaho‘ohanohano v. State, 114 Hawai'i 302, 342 , 162 P.3d 696 , 736 (2007) (construing the intent of article XVI, section 2 of the Hawai

2010See Sierra Club v. Dep’t of Transp. of State of Hawai'i, 120 Hawai'i 181, 196 , 202 P.3d 1226, 1241 (2009) (observing that this court has “long recognized that the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent” (quoting Hanabusa v. Lingle, 105 Hawai'i 28, 31-32 , 93 P.3d 670, 673-74 (2004))); Kaho‘ohanohano v. State, 114 Hawai'i 302, 342 , 162 P.3d 696 , 736 (2007) (construing the intent of article XVI, section 2 of the Hawai

2004We have also long recognized that "[t]he Hawai'i Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it[,]" Kam, 69 Haw. at 492 , 748 P.2d at 377 , and that "the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent." Id.

2004We have also long recognized that "[t]he Hawai'i Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it[,]" Kam, 69 Haw. at 492 , 748 P.2d at 377 , and that "the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent." Id.

1983See also First Insurance Company of Hawaii, Ltd. v. International Harvester Company, 66 Haw. __ (No. 6786, February 15, 1983); Ono v. Applegate, 62 Haw. 131 , 612 P.2d 533 (1980); Seibel v. City & County, 61 Haw. 253 , 602 P.2d 532 (1979).

1983See also First Insurance Company of Hawaii, Ltd. v. International Harvester Company, 66 Haw. __ (No. 6786, February 15, 1983); Ono v. Applegate, 62 Haw. 131 , 612 P.2d 533 (1980); Seibel v. City & County, 61 Haw. 253 , 602 P.2d 532 (1979).

2020"It is a fundamental principle of law that there must be mutual assent or a meeting of the minds on all essential elements or terms in order to form a binding contract." Carson v. Saito, 53 Haw. 178, 182 , 489 P.2d 636, 638 (1971) (quoting Honolulu Rapid Transit v. Paschoal, 51 Haw. 19, 26-27 , 449 P.2d 123, 127 (1968)) (internal quotation marks omitted).

2020"It is a fundamental principle of law that there must be mutual assent or a meeting of the minds on all essential elements or terms in order to form a binding contract." Carson v. Saito, 53 Haw. 178, 182 , 489 P.2d 636, 638 (1971) (quoting Honolulu Rapid Transit v. Paschoal, 51 Haw. 19, 26-27 , 449 P.2d 123, 127 (1968)) (internal quotation marks omitted).

2016DISCUSSION A The Petitioners’ Burden of Proof It is a fundamental principle that the intent of the settlor, as expressed in the trust instrument, shall prevail, “unless inconsistent with some positive rule of law.” In re Lock Revocable Trust, 109 Hawai'i at 151-52 , 123 P.3d at 1246-47 (citation omitted).

2016DISCUSSION A The Petitioners’ Burden of Proof It is a fundamental principle that the intent of the settlor, as expressed in the trust instrument, shall prevail, “unless inconsistent with some positive rule of law.” In re Lock Revocable Trust, 109 Hawai'i at 151-52 , 123 P.3d at 1246-47 (citation omitted).

2013See State v. Unea, 60 Haw. 504, 509 , 591 P.2d 615, 619 (1979) (“To refuse to so instruct the jury would be to invade its province in the trial of a ease.”); Stenger, 122 Hawai'i at 302 n. 2, 226 P.3d at 472 n. 2 (“The jurors, and they alone, are to judge of the facts, and weigh the evidence.”); see also State v. Quitog, 85 Hawai'i 128, 145 , 938 P.2d 559, 576 (1997) (“This court has adhered for over 140 years to the fundamental principle, which lies at the foundation of jury trial in every country blessed with that institution, that the jury is to pass upon the facts and the court upon the la

2013See State v. Unea, 60 Haw. 504, 509 , 591 P.2d 615, 619 (1979) (“To refuse to so instruct the jury would be to invade its province in the trial of a ease.”); Stenger, 122 Hawai'i at 302 n. 2, 226 P.3d at 472 n. 2 (“The jurors, and they alone, are to judge of the facts, and weigh the evidence.”); see also State v. Quitog, 85 Hawai'i 128, 145 , 938 P.2d 559, 576 (1997) (“This court has adhered for over 140 years to the fundamental principle, which lies at the foundation of jury trial in every country blessed with that institution, that the jury is to pass upon the facts and the court upon the la

2008Legal Duty “A fundamental requirement of a negligence action is the existence of a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff,” 31 Namauu v. City & County of Honolulu, 62 Haw. 358, 361 , 614 P.2d 943, 945 (1980) (citations omitted), that requires the defendant “to conform to a certain standard of conduct for the protection of others against unreasonable risks,” Birmingham v. Fodor’s Travel Publ’ns, Inc., 73 Haw. 359, 366, 833 P.2d 70, 74 (1992) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

2008Legal Duty “A fundamental requirement of a negligence action is the existence of a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff,” 31 Namauu v. City & County of Honolulu, 62 Haw. 358, 361 , 614 P.2d 943, 945 (1980) (citations omitted), that requires the defendant “to conform to a certain standard of conduct for the protection of others against unreasonable risks,” Birmingham v. Fodor’s Travel Publ’ns, Inc., 73 Haw. 359, 366, 833 P.2d 70, 74 (1992) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

2019And, as stated, "we have long recognized that the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent." Sierra Club v. Dep't of Transp. of Hawai'i , 120 Hawai'i 181 , 196, 202 P.3d 1226 , 1241 (2009) (quoting Hanabusa v. Lingle , 105 Hawai'i 28 , 31-32, 93 P.3d 670 , 673-74 (2004) ).

2019And, as stated, "we have long recognized that the Hawaii Constitution must be construed with due regard to the intent of the framers and the people adopting it, and the fundamental principle in interpreting a constitutional provision is to give effect to that intent." Sierra Club v. Dep't of Transp. of Hawai'i , 120 Hawai'i 181 , 196, 202 P.3d 1226 , 1241 (2009) (quoting Hanabusa v. Lingle , 105 Hawai'i 28 , 31-32, 93 P.3d 670 , 673-74 (2004) ).

2018Even assuming an ambiguity exists in these constitutional provisions, this court has "repeatedly held that the fundamental principle in construing a constitutional provision is to give effect to the intention of the framers and the people adopting it." Everson , 122 Hawai'i at 407 , 228 P.3d at 287 (quoting Pray v. Judicial Selection Comm'n of the State of Haw. , 75 Haw. 333 , 343, 861 P.2d 723 , 728 (1993) ).

2010However, “[w]hen resolving an ambiguity, we have repeatedly held ‘that the fundamental principle in construing a constitutional provision is to give effect to the intention of the framers and the people adopting it.’ ” Pray v. Judicial Selection Comm’n of the State of Hawai‘i, 75 Haw. 333, 343 , 861 P.2d 723, 728 (1993) (citation omitted, brackets added). “[I]n gleaning the intent of the framers and the people, ... ‘an examination of the debates, proceedings and committee reports [of the Constitutional Convention] is useful.’ Such evidence, however, ‘do[es] not have binding force on this court

2008Hayes v. Gill, 52 Haw. 251, 267 , 473 P.2d 872, 882 (1970) ("The right to run for elective office and right to vote for candidates running for such office uphold a fundamental principle of our representative democracy which is, in Alexander Hamilton's words, quoted by Mr. Chief Justice Warren, `that the people should choose whom they please to govern them.'" (Quoting Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 547 , 89 S.Ct. 1944 , 23 L.Ed.2d 491 (1969).)). [6] HRS § 50-11 reads: Every charter established under this chapter shall provide means by which the charter may be amended or revised.

2008Hayes v. Gill, 52 Haw. 251, 267 , 473 P.2d 872, 882 (1970) ("The right to run for elective office and right to vote for candidates running for such office uphold a fundamental principle of our representative democracy which is, in Alexander Hamilton's words, quoted by Mr. Chief Justice Warren, `that the people should choose whom they please to govern them.'" (Quoting Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 547 , 89 S.Ct. 1944 , 23 L.Ed.2d 491 (1969).)). [6] HRS § 50-11 reads: Every charter established under this chapter shall provide means by which the charter may be amended or revised.