TMT - Contested Case Hearing Status - Hilo

[galileo]

OBJECTIONS TO THE PETITION
On May 9, 2011 Counsel for the Applicant filed a Reply Brief on the Issue of Standing. Counsel objected to granting Mo’oinanea standing based on the following arguments:

• The Hawai’i Supreme Court has ruled that a plain English reading can be applied to the definition of “person” under the Hawaiian Administrative Procedures Act. A plain English reading here makes it clear that a spirit does not qualify. Webster’s Dictionary
  defines “person” as a “human being, individual,” while Black’s Law Dictionary defines “person” as “in general usage, a human being.” The petition asserts that Mo’oinanea is not a human being.
• To allow a spirit into the proceedings then it would lead to absurd results. If the Board
  allowed a spirit to be part of a contested case hearing, then it would presumably also have
  to allow, for example, deceased persons or even animals.
• The petitioners do not have the authority to appear on behalf of Mo’ oineanea. HAS § 13-
  1-10 does not recognize an ancestral representative as an authorized representative. A
  person can only appear on his or her own behalfor represented by counsel.

HEARING OFFICER’S CONCLUSION

The Hearing Officer concluded that “all the information presented indicated that Mo’oinanea is a spirit, not a person,” and recommended that her petition be denied as she did not meet the requirements of HAR §13-1-21 and §13-1-2 to be admitted as a party.