Opinion ID: 2630674
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Filing fees

Text: The State contends that the filing fees requested by ParEn are duplicative and/or that ParEn did not disclose the purpose for paying the filing fees and when the filing fees were paid. Nor, argues the State, does ParEn prove which court charged the fee(s) or how the fee relates to this appeal. Inasmuch as appeals by non-indigent parties generally require prepayment of fees, the why, when, and to whom are self-evident as to $225.00 of the $327.36 requested. See HRAP Rule 45(e)(5) (Supreme Court filing fee of $100.00); HRS §§ 607-5(c)(23) (Supp.2004) (circuit court fee of $100.00 upon filing of notice of appeal), 607-5.7 (Supp.2001) ($25.00 surcharge for indigent legal services); HRAP Rule 3(a), (f) (consequences of failure to pay, including dismissal of appeal). Moreover, the State's suggestion that ParEn has attempted to double-dip by requesting the same $225.00 in the circuit court is less than candid, and unavailing: through standard and common procedure, the Appellees would have been charged a different $225.00 by the circuit court for their initial complaint against HDCC, see HRS §§ 607-5(b)(1) (Supp.2004) (filing fee), 607-5.7, supra (surcharge), and scrutiny of the State's own exhibit reveals this to be the case (receipts for COMP/PAREN, INC VS HI DREDGING CONST CO ($200.00) and SRCHG/PAREN, INC. VS HI DREDGING CONSTRN ($25.00)). Nonetheless, neither ParEn's counsel's declaration nor its copious exhibits document the expenditure of the remaining $102.36. Consequently, we deny ParEn $102.36 of the requested $327.36.