Title: Preble v. Board of Trustees of the Employees Retirement System of the State of Hawaii

State: hawaii

Issuer: Hawaii Supreme Court

Document:

#4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION in WEST’ S HAWAI'I REPORTS
‘and PACIFIC REPORTER *** 2|

   
 

No. 25714

WY 02 das soa

gawd

  
   

DUANE PREBLE, MARION EVERSON, and CHARLES K.
Plaintiffs-Appellants,

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF
THE STATE OF HAWAI'I; DAVID SHIMABUKURO, Administrator of the
Employees’ Retirement System of the State of Hawai'i; and
EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE STATE OF HAWAT'L,
Defendant s-Appeliees.

APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT
(Civ. No. 02-1-1972)

RDF
(gy: Moon, ¢.J., Levingon, Nakayama, and Acoba, JJ., and
Circuit Judge Masuoka, assigned by ‘reason of vacancy.)

The plaintiffs-appellants Duane Preble, Marion Everson,
and Charles x. ¥. Khim (hereinafter, “the Appellants”) appeal
from the March 12, 2003 judgnent of the circuit court of the
first circuit, the Honorable Virginia Lea Crandall presiding.

on appeal, the Appellants urge that the doctrine of
primary jurisdiction did not apply to the present matter inasmuch
as (2) “the dispute before the [circuit clourt did not involve
technical matters that called for the special expertise of the
[defendant-appellee Board of Trustees (“the Board”) of the
defendant-appellee Enployees’ Retirenent System of the State of
Hawai'i (ERS)]," and (2) “the . . . Board already applied its

special expertise to the gravamen of the contested case claim{)
### NOT FOR PUBLICATION in WEST’ S HAWAI'I REPORTS
and PACIFIC REPORTER ***

when[,] on February @, 1999, the . . . Board determined that said
contested case claim had merit.” The Appellants add that the
Board should have been disqualified from deciding the Appellants’
entitienent to fees because it is biased or had the appearance of
bias. Furthermore, the Appellants protest that to exhaust
available remedies in the Board would have been futile.

Next, the Appellants argue that the circuit court
misapplied the criteria for injunctive relief pendente lite set
forth in v, Transp, Lease Hawaii, Ltd., 2 Haw. App. 272, 276
& nil, 630 P.2d 646, 649 & n.1, 650 (1982), inasmuch as
irreparable damage favored injunction, the Appellants were likely
to succeed on the merits, and the public interest would be
served.

Finally, the Appellants argue that the Board improperly
appointed a master to conduct a hearing. (Citing Hawai'i Revised
Statutes § 92-16(a) (3) (1993).

The present appeal arises from the Appellants’ efforts
to enjoin further pension disbursements without deducting
attorney's fees. Our recent holding in Preble v. Bd. of Trs. of
the ERS, No. 26186, slip op. at 18 (Haw. Sept. 20, 2006), that
the Board lacked the authority to award fees, bars the Appellants
from obtaining “effective remedy” in the present appeal, a sine
gua non of justiciability. See In re Doe, 102 Hawai'i 75, 77, 73
P.3d 29, 31 (2003). Therefore,
‘#** No FOR PUBLICATION in WEST’ S HAWAI'I REPORTS
and PACIFIC REPORTER ***

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed

as moot.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i,

on the briefs:

Charles K. Y. Khim,
pro se and for the
plaintiffs-appellants
Duane Preble and
Marion Everson

Kevin P.H. Sumida and
Lance $. Au of Matsui

Chung Sumida & Tsuchiyama,
for the defendants-appellees
ERS and David Shimabukuro

Kimberly Tsumoto,

Deputy Attorney General,
for the defendant-appellee
Board of the ERS

September 20, 2006.

DerGbrinre—
Preset Oi One

2

Learpes

A

aa

fessor