Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-1.5 (2026)

Administration of this part

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§92-1.5 Administration of this part. The director of the office of information practices shall administer this part. The director shall establish procedures for filing and responding to complaints filed by any person concerning the failure of any board to comply with this part. An agency may not appeal a decision by the office of information practices made under this chapter, except as provided in section 92F-43. The director of the office of information practices shall submit an annual report of these complaints along with final resolution of complaints, and other statistical data to the legislature, no later than twenty days prior to the convening of each regular session. [L 1998, c 137, §2; am L 2012, c 176, §2]

Law Journals and Reviews

2013 Law and Administrative Rules Governing Appeal Procedures of Hawaii's Office of Information Practices. 36 UH L. Rev. 271 (2014).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2013–2019 · leading case: Civil Beat Law Ctr. for the Pub. Interest, Inc. v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 445 P.3d 47 (Haw. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Civil Beat Law Ctr. for the Pub. Interest, Inc. v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 445 P.3d 47 (Haw. 2019). “HRS § 92-1.5 (2012). "Opinions and rulings of the office of information practices shall be admissible in an action brought under this part and shall be considered as precedent unless found to be palpably erroneous.”

Kanahele v. Maui Cnty. Council., 307 P.3d 1174 (Haw. 2013). · cites it 2× “17 HRS § 92-1.5 (2012). As such, its opinions are entitled to deference so long as they are consistent with the legislative intent of the statute and are not palpably erroneous.”

Civil Beat Law Ctr. for the Pub. Interest, Inc. v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu. (Haw. 2019). “HRS § 92-1.5 (2012). “Opinions and rulings of the office of information practices shall be admissible in an action brought under this part and shall be considered as precedent unless found to be palpably erroneous.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.