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.
8 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2016 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Burk v. Sunngreen2 sentences2015“Rules not promulgated in accordance with the HAPA rule-making requirements are invalid and unenforceable.” Id. (citing Burk v. Sunn, 68 Haw. 80, 83 , 705 P.2d 17, 20-21 (1985)). 2015“Rules not promulgated in accordance with the HAPA rule-making requirements are invalid and unenforceable.” Id. (citing Burk v. Sunn, 68 Haw. 80, 83 , 705 P.2d 17, 20-21 (1985)). | 2 | 2 |
Korean Buddhist Dae Won Sa Temple v. Sullivangreen2 sentences2004See also Korean Buddhist Dae Won Sa Temple of Hawai'i v. Sullivan, 87 Hawai'i 217, 241 , 953 P.2d 1315, 1339 (1998) (“In conducting [a] review [of alleged procedural errors], this court must often employ a type of harmless error analysis to violations of HAP A. Thus, if the [agency] Director’s consultation of evidence outside the record did not affect the [party’s] substantial rights, his decision must be affirmed despite the technical HAPA violation.”). 2004See also Korean Buddhist Dae Won Sa Temple of Hawai'i v. Sullivan, 87 Hawai'i 217, 241 , 953 P.2d 1315, 1339 (1998) (“In conducting [a] review [of alleged procedural errors], this court must often employ a type of harmless error analysis to violations of HAP A. Thus, if the [agency] Director’s consultation of evidence outside the record did not affect the [party’s] substantial rights, his decision must be affirmed despite the technical HAPA violation.”). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Rowleygreen2 sentences1998“The express legislative objective of the HAPA rule-making procedures is to provide for public participation in the rule-making process, by allowing any interested person to petition for a change in the rules as well as to participate in a public hearing.” State v. Rowley, 70 Haw. 135, 137-38 , 764 P.2d 1233, 1235 (1988) (citing Hse. 1998“The express legislative objective of the HAPA rule-making procedures is to provide for public participation in the rule-making process, by allowing any interested person to petition for a change in the rules as well as to participate in a public hearing.” State v. Rowley, 70 Haw. 135, 137-38 , 764 P.2d 1233, 1235 (1988) (citing Hse. | 1 | 1 |
Bar Mk Ranches v. Yuettergreen1 sentence1998Cf. Bar MK Ranches v. Yuetter, 994 F.2d 735, 740 (10th Cir.1993) (“Although allegations of a post 'hoc addition to the Administrative Record sufficiently alleges procedural error, an allegation of a post hoc addition does not in itself sufficiently allege prejudice.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rose v. Oba
green
2 sentences2015“Rules not promulgated in accordance with the HAPA rule-making requirements are invalid and unenforceable.” Id. (citing Burk v. Sunn, 68 Haw. 80, 83 , 705 P.2d 17, 20-21 (1985)). 2015“Rules not promulgated in accordance with the HAPA rule-making requirements are invalid and unenforceable.” Id. (citing Burk v. Sunn, 68 Haw. 80, 83 , 705 P.2d 17, 20-21 (1985)). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Tax Appeal of Hawaii Prince Hotel Waikiki Corp. v. City & County of Honolulu
green
2 sentences2014Third, citing to Hawai’i Prince Hotel v. City and County of Honolulu, 89 Hawai'i 381 , 974 P.2d 21 (1999), Pila'a 400 argues that a methodology to determine value is a “rule” within the meaning of HRS § 91-1(4) and requires HAPA rule-making procedures. 2014Third, citing to Hawai#i Prince Hotel v. City and County of Honolulu, 89 Hawai#i 381, 974 P.2d 21 (1999), Pila#a 400 argues that a methodology to determine value is a “rule” within the meaning of HRS § 91-1(4) and requires HAPA rule-making procedures. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Doe v. Chang
green
2 sentences1992In Doe v. Chang, 58 Haw. 94 , 564 P.2d 1272 (1977), three welfare recipient plaintiffs sought injunctive relief from investigations and prosecutions of welfare fraud on the ground that the State welfare fraud procedures were invalid because the manual of instructions concerning welfare fraud investigations was not adopted in accordance with HAPA’s rule-making requirements. 1992In Doe v. Chang, 58 Haw. 94 , 564 P.2d 1272 (1977), three welfare recipient plaintiffs sought injunctive relief from investigations and prosecutions of welfare fraud on the ground that the State welfare fraud procedures were invalid because the manual of instructions concerning welfare fraud investigations was not adopted in accordance with HAPA’s rule-making requirements. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.