Case Title: Taomae v. Lingle

Citation: 110 Haw. 327

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2006-05-26T00:00:00Z

Document:
LAW Libnant

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

 

.o0e-
ee

PATRICK Y. TAOMAE, BARBARA L. FRANKLIN, GENE BRIDGES,
NAN KRAUMOANA, A. JORIS WATLAND, GEORGE HARRIS,
HACKSOON ANDREA LOW, ESTHER SOLOMON, RICHARD G. CHISHOLM,
MICHAEL J, GOLOJUCH, CHRISTOPHER A.” VERLEYE, HEATHER K.L.

CONAHAN, JULIET BEGLEY, PAMELA G. LICHTY, SHERYL 1.
NICHOLSON, ERIC G. SCHNEDIER, CAROLYN M. GOLOJUCH:
COLIN YOST, WILLIAM A, HARRISON, NORMAN V. BODE, RODNEY B.
RIU, RICHARD C. JACKSON, THEODORE N. ISAAC, MARK R. EWALD,
Rv! MICHAEL G. YOUNG, PAULA F. MYERS, LOUIS ROSOF, JOAN H
ICH, SUSAN L. ARNETT, PAMELA O'LEARY TOWER, DAVID
BETTENCOURT, LUNSFORD DOLE PHILLIPS, MARY ANNE SCHEELE,
RAYMOND SCHEELE, ROBERT P. MCPHERSON, JEAN A. EVANS,
DONALD E. EVANS, and ARTHUR £. ROSS, Plaintiffs

 

 

LINDA LINGLE, in her official capacity as Governor
TIN Ne SE gawastty and DHATNE D. TOSI 3
sore Seats OE techy ‘ag ehige Blection ofnigee”

Laan epee Ze tawai'i, Desendants vl.

2

2

 
 

No. 26962 se

aa

equesr ros arromweys' Fees ano costs SBE
wax 26, 2006
oon, Caos) LEVINSON, NRRERKR, ACOBA, AND OUFEY, 39.
ORDER OF AMENDMENT
ne opinion of the court filed on April 28, 2006 in the
snoverentivied case, Se corsected as follovs (deleted material
ne page 2, Lines 11-12 from the bottom: (18 is
econnended that t) he requested attorneys’ fees [bel
axa denied, and (vhat) the requested reimbursement for
costs (bel it
At page 9, line 6 from the bottom: [it is
recommended that] attorneys’ fees under HRS § 607-14.5
(he) axe,

At page 12, lines 3-4 from the top: therefore, an
award of fees based on this argument is [not
recommended] denied. First, the matter before this
court is not in the

At page 15, line 6 from the top: server exceeds
these authorities. [It is recommended that t] The

At page 15, line @ from the top to page 16, line 1
from the top: [be] jg partially granted, the request
for costs of a transcript [be] ig denied, and the
request for costs of service of process [be] ig

At page 16, line 1 from the bottom to page 17,
Line 1 from the top and note 20: reasonable amount for
such costs, [it is recommended that) this amount [be]
dg awarded.” See also HRAP Rule 39(c} (5) (authorizing
an

At page 18, lines 10-11 from the top:
reimbursement of $46.87 (should be] ig granted.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs (should be allowed) are

granted a reduced

 

#8 In addition, HRAP Rule 39 does not preclude the recovery of costs

of printing and copying’ pleadings for the benefit of snicus curiae. Given the

Feasenablen

 

of providing the legislature with such copies in the present

Gese, [it is recommenced tnat this costs bs) ‘his cost ie granted.

2
hn amended opinion is being filed concurrently with
this order, incorporating the foregoing amendments. The Clerk of
the Court is directed to provide a copy of this order and a copy
of the amended opinion to the parties and notify the publishing
agencies of the changes. The Clerk of the Court is further
instructed to distribute copies of this order of amendment to

those who received the previously filed opinion

Sp
ithe
Neen Oren o-

Bo oN

aren €. Dusiys B+