ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Real Estate & Property Law Blogs -> inversecondemnation

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Real Estate & Property Law

: inversecondemnation

Too Late For "Never Mind" in the Ceded Lands Case

By Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)

ADVERTISEMENTS

On October 1, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the Hawaii Supreme Court's decision in Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. Housing and Community Dev. Corp. of Hawaii, 117 Haw. 174, 177 P.3d 884 (Jan. 31, 2008).  That decision held Congress' "Apology Resolution" required the State of Hawaii to reach a political settlement with Native Hawaiians, and prohibited the State from selling, exchanging, or transferring the ceded lands until that political resolution was accomplished. [Disclosure: I filed an amicus brief in the case, supporting the state's petition.]

The Honolulu Advertiser reported about a rally yesterday at the State Capitol urging the Lingle administration to "rescind its U.S. Supreme Court appeal of a state court ruling that bars the state from selling ceded lands until claims of Native Hawaiians are resolved." "Groups oppose ceded-land appeal to U.S. Supreme Court."  This is the "ceded lands" case, Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, No. 07-1372 (cert. granted Oct. 1, 2008).

The Hawaii Supreme Court decision is being reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court by way of a discretionary writ of certiorari, not an "appeal." While this is a technical difference, the difference is critical. "Appeals" are generally taken as a matter of right, but certiorari review is entirely up to the Supreme Court -- in other words, you have to ask the Court to review the lower court's decision, and it most often says no; it usually only says yes when a case will have nationwide impact.

Thus, asking the Supreme Court to make yours one of the 70-90 cases it actually hears out of the 7,000 or more requests it considers each term is a big step, and the petitioning party stakes a lot of its credibility by asking the Court for review. The State of Hawaii, having taken this step -- and being joined by 29 other states in urging the Court to focus on this case -- would be hard-pressed to now just say, in the words of Gilda Radner's SNL character Emily Litella, "never mind."

Visit our ceded lands case page, with the briefs, media reports, and the decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court.

Full post as published by inversecondemnation on November 25, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0211 secs (new cache)