5 Hawaii opinions name it 1 courts 2008–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
Kahoohanohano v. Stategreen2 sentences2013In this jurisdiction, "[t]he crucial inquiry with regard to standing is whether the plaintiff has alleged such a personal stake in the controversy as to warrant his or her invocation of the court's jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court's remedial powers on his or her behalf.” Kaho'ohanohano v. State, 114 Hawai'i 302, 318 , 162 P.3d 696, 712 (2007) (internal quotation marks removed) (emphasis in original). "[I]n deciding whether the plaintiff has a requisite interest in the outcome of the litigation, we employ a three part test: (1) has the plaintiff suffered an actual or threatened 2013In this jurisdiction, "[t]he crucial inquiry with regard to standing is whether the plaintiff has alleged such a personal stake in the controversy as to warrant his or her invocation of the court's jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court's remedial powers on his or her behalf.” Kaho'ohanohano v. State, 114 Hawai'i 302, 318 , 162 P.3d 696, 712 (2007) (internal quotation marks removed) (emphasis in original). "[I]n deciding whether the plaintiff has a requisite interest in the outcome of the litigation, we employ a three part test: (1) has the plaintiff suffered an actual or threatened | 3 | 3 |
Keahole Defense Coalition, Inc. v. Board of Land & Natural Resourcesgreen2 sentences2008Coal., 110 Hawai'i at 434, 134 P.3d at 600 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). 2008Coal., 110 Hawai'i at 434, 134 P.3d at 600 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kaho'ohanohano v. State
green
1 sentence2013In this jurisdiction, "[t]he crucial inquiry with regard to standing is whether the plaintiff has alleged such a personal stake in the controversy as to warrant his or her invocation of the court's jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court's remedial powers on his or her behalf.” Kaho'ohanohano v. State, 114 Hawai'i 302, 318 , 162 P.3d 696, 712 (2007) (internal quotation marks removed) (emphasis in original). "[I]n deciding whether the plaintiff has a requisite interest in the outcome of the litigation, we employ a three part test: (1) has the plaintiff suffered an actual or threatened | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Perry v. Planning Commission of the County of Hawaii
green
2 sentences2008In Perry [v. Planning Comm'n of Hawaii County, 62 Haw. 666 , 619 P.2d 95 (1980)], this court articulated a three-prong test for determining when the word "shall" may be interpreted as directory. 2008In Perry [v. Planning Comm'n of Hawaii County, 62 Haw. 666 , 619 P.2d 95 (1980)], this court articulated a three-prong test for determining when the word "shall" may be interpreted as directory. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.