2026-06-04 Proposed Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law; Decision and Order (PL-BOA-2025-000119).pdf

Home

25. When there are well -pleaded factual allegations, the adjudicative body should assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief. Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv., 572 F.3d 962, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) citing to Ashcroft v. Igbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949-50, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009). 26. While an adjudicative body must take all the factual allegations in the pleadings as true, it is not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation. Ashcroft v. Igbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949-50, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009). 27. Standing also requires that the injury be within the "zone of interests" protected or regulated by the relevant statute. Life of the Land, 63 Haw. at 173, 623 P.2d at 439. 28. An injury that cannot be redressed by a favorable decision is fatal to standing. See Kia'i Wai O Wai'ale'ale v. Bd. Of Land and Nat. Res., 157 Hawaii 303, 317, 576 P.3d 816, 831 (2025). 29. Appellant has not alleged facts sufficient to support a claim of an injury which so directly and immediately adversely affects herself that her interest is distinguishable from that of the general public as required by BOA Rule 8-2. Appellant's alleged injuries relating to neighborhood traffic congestion, short-term vacation rental use, and beach parking and evacuation are matters of general concern. 30. The Board need not accept Appellant's conclusionary statements that such construction would lead to increased use of the property or create neighborhood traffic congestion. 31. Because Appellant's allegations of injury based on neighborhood traffic, short- term vacation rental usage of the subject property, and access to and from her residence are not pertinent to evaluation of an SMA determination, the Board cannot grant the relief Appellant seeks. M