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

Report On Residency Challenge Appeal: Is Intending To Live Somewhere Enough To Be "Residing" There?

By Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)

ADVERTISEMENTS

In High court ruling on residency requested, the Maui News reports on Dupree v. Hiraga, No. 29464, the appeal of the decision by the State Board of Registration (County of Maui) which concluded that a Maui County councilperson who registered as a Lanai resident is actually a resident of Maui.

Attorneys for a Lanai man challenging County Council Member Sol Kaho'ohalahala's claim of Lanai residency are applying for the case to be transferred directly to the Hawaii Supreme Court.

Kaho'ohalahala's appeal of a ruling that he is actually a resident of Lahaina - not Lanai, from which he holds the residency seat on the council - is pending before the Intermediate Court of Appeals. But attorneys for his challenger, Michael "Phoenix" Dupree, said the importance of the case justifies a move to the Supreme Court, and asked for the case to be expedited.

"Whether an individual who is registered as a resident of one district may register in another district and vote in an election merely by declaring that he has an intent to make the new district his residence is an issue of fundamental importance," Dupree's attorneys wrote in court documents.

Disclosure: we represent the challenger.

As noted in the story, we recently applied to the Hawaii Supreme Court for a transfer of the case from the Intermediate Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court, and for expedited consideration pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. § 11-52 (1993). Transfer of an appeal from the ICA to the Supreme Court is mandatory if the appeal involves "a question of imperative or fundamental public importance." Transfer is discretionary if it involves "a question of first impression or a novel legal question." Haw. Rev. Stat. § 602-58 (1993). Appeals of residency issues are of great public importance and are subject to speedy resolution under section 11-52, which provides "[w]hen the appeal is perfected, the court shall hear the appeal as soon thereafter as may be reasonable."

More on the appeal here, including the briefs of the parties.

Full post as published by inversecondemnation on June 13, 2009 (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.
Related Law Articles

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!






0.013 secs (new cache)