Laserfiche WebLink
***FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER*** <br /> tax, and interest should be denied, " (4 ) "photocopying costs are <br /> excessive, " and (5) Appellant should receive Nino attorney' s fees <br /> for unsuccessful claims . " <br /> C <br /> As noted previously, Oceanside Joins in the County' s <br /> Opposition and Reply and, additionally, seeks to clarify that <br /> "HRS § 101-27 only allows a condemnation defendant to 'recover <br /> from the -plaintiff [ . ] "' (Quoting HRS § 101-27 . ) (Emphasis <br /> supplied by Oceanside . ) Because "Oceanside was not the plaintiff <br /> in [Condemnation 1] or [in Civ. No. 05-1-015K (Condemnation 2) , ] " <br /> and Appellant' s Request was filed "only against the County and <br /> not against Oceanside [ , ] " Oceanside urges that this court <br /> `expressly rule that [Appellant] is not entitled to relief under <br /> HRS § 101-27 from Oceanside . " <br /> As set forth supra, because "the property in question <br /> was not finally taken in Condemnation l, " C&J Coupe, 119 Hawaii <br /> at 364 , 198 P. 3d at 627, HRS § 101-27 provides that the <br /> defendant, i . e . , Appellant, "shall be entitled, in such <br /> proceedings, to recover from the plaintiff [ , i . e. , the County, ] <br /> all such damage as may have been sustained by the defendant by <br /> reason of the bringing of the proceedings . . . including the <br /> defendant' s costs of court, a reasonable amount to cover <br /> attorney' s fees paid by the defendant in connection therewith, <br /> and other reasonable expenses [ . ] " Thus, the threshold question <br /> 5 <br />