Laserfiche WebLink
TABLE OF CONTENTS <br /> I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE......................................................................................2-13 <br /> A. Introduction............................................................................................................. 2 <br /> B. History of the Case.............................................................................................2-13 <br /> 11. STANDARD OF REVIEW......................................................................................... 13-15 <br /> A. Abatement Claims—Clearly Erroneous .......................................................... 13-14 <br /> B. Motion for Statutory Damages—De Novo..................................................... 15 <br /> C. Pretext for Public Use Claim—Clearly Erroneous............................................... 15 <br /> III. ARGUMENT .............................................................................................................. 16-28 <br /> A. Abatement Decision Should be Affirmed........................................................16-21 <br /> B. Motion for Statutory Damages was Properly Denied......................................22-26 <br /> C. Trial Court Properly Found Public Purpose.....................................................26-28 <br /> IV. CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. 28 <br /> APPENDIX"A" Transcript of Proceedings of November 8, 2007, in County of Hawaii v. <br /> Robert Nigel Richards,et al., CV. No. 00-1-0181 K and 05-1-015K <br />