Legal Process Docs:
Our initial legal action was a complaint filed in federal court on May 11, 2011 by plaintiffs, Honolulutraffic.com, Governor Ben Cayetano, Judge Walter Heen, Professor Randal Roth, Senator Sam Slom's SBH Educational Foundation, Hawaii's Thousand Friends, Dr. Michael Uechi MD, and Cliff Slater, against the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the City and County of Honolulu (City).
Since then the City and the FTA have responded separately denying everything and, in addition, have jointly filed Motions to dismiss some of the plaintiffs, and to dismiss some of our allegations concerning historic properties. Our attorneys believe these are nuisance motions intended to delay matters and to try run up our legal bills so that we would be unable to continue with the lawsuit. Judge A. Wallace Tashima agreed with our defense that neither the standing of plaintiffs nor the Defendants' 4(f) concerns can be determined until such time as the Defendants produce the Administrative Record, which Judge A. Wallace Tashima ruled that they must produce the Index by January 20, 2012, and the full electronic version of the Administrative Record by February 24, 2012.
We received the Administrative Record on February 24. It is approximately 44Gb in size and consists of 155,000 pages. We will comment on it later.
Full details of the environmental process are available at www.honolulutraffic.com/processdocs.htm
Here is a third party attorney's view of the proceedings from inversecondemnation.com
Not included in this listing are minor declarations and proofs of service.
Hawaii Federal District Court:
Original Complaint 5/11/11.
City's response to the Complaint. 7/18/11.
FTA's response the Complaint. 8/12/11.
Roth et al. Press Release re the FTA response. 8/13/11
FTA/City Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. 9/9/11.
FTA/City Motion for Judicial Notice. 9/9/11.
Roth et al. Press Release re the FTA Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. 9/12/11.
Plaintiff's response to the FTA Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 9/26/11.
Plaintiff's response to the FTA request for judicial notice. 9/26/11.
Roth et al. Press Release re the filing of the Response. 9/27/11.
Defendant's reply to the Plaintiffs response. 10/11/11.
Nossaman Letter to Yost. 10/26/2011.
Transcript of the November 30th hearing.
Court's Order on Defendant's Motion for Judicial Notice. 10/31/11.
Letter Yost to Whitfield, Thornton et al. 12/2/2011.
Court's Order on Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings. 12/12/11.
HART requests a Letter of No Prejudice. 12/27/2011.
FTA's acceptance of city's entry into final design. 12/29/2011
Memorandum to support Plaintiffs amendment to Complaint. 12/29/2012.
Declaration of Robert Loy re above Memorandum. 12/29/2012.
Filings re intervenors. 1/3/2012.
Minute Order defers scheduling conference. 1/09/12.
Scheduling order. 1/10/2012.
Stipulation for Defendants time to file amended complaint. 1/11/2012.
Defendants have to 1/23 to file a response. 1/12/2012.
Order for time to respond to intervenors filing. 1/20/2012.
Opposition of Plaintiffs to intervenors. 1/26/2012
Declaration of Yost opposing intervenors. 1/26/2012.
Plaintiffs' attorneys' letter to Defendants' attorneys. 1/27/2012.
Defendants' attorneys' letter Plaintiffs' attorneys. 2/3/2012.
Administrative Record Index from FTA. 2/3/2012.
FTA grants LONP to HART. 2/6/2012.
Defendant's memo in support of motion for PSJ 2/17/2012.
Plaintiff's Opposition to motion for PSJ. 3/5/2012.
Defendants memo support motion for PSJ re waiver of 4(f) claims.
Plaintiff's opposition to Defendants 2nd Motion for PSJ re waiver of 4(f) claims.
Status Conference Order. 3/27/2012.
Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. 4/6/2012.
Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint. 4/14/2012.
National Trust for Historic Preservation Motion to File Amicus Brief. 4/16/2012.
Intervenors Answer to Amended Complaint. 5/7/2012.
City Answer to Amended Complaint. 5/7/2012.
Federal Defendants' Answer 6/7/2012.
Judge's Order on Defendant's MPSJ. 5/17/2012.
National Trust for Historic Preservation's amicus brief. 5/23/2012
Internvenors Memo Opposing Plaintiff's MSJ. 6/1/2012
Memo Supporting Defendants MSJ. 6/1/2012.
Federal Defendants Opposition to Plaintiff's MSJ. 6/1/2012.
Plaintiff's Reply in Support of MSJ. 6/22/2012
Federal Defendents Reply to Plaintiffs. 7/13/2012.
City's Reply to Plaintiffs. 7/13/2012.
Intervenor's Reply to Plaintiffs. 7//13/2012.
Exhibit to Intervenor's Reply. 7/13/2012.
Transcript of August 21 hearing
Ruling in the federal lawsuit on November 1, 2012.
Transcript of December 12 hearing.
Final ruling by Judge Tashima December 27, 2012.
Click here for the complete legal history of our case through December 27, 2012 from PACER.
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals:
Expedite request granted. May 2, 2013.
Our appeal filed. May 15, 2013.
National Trust for Historic Preservation amicus brief. 052319.
FTA reply brief. June 19, 2013.
City reply brief. June 19, 2013.
PRP reply brief. June 19, 2013.
Our reply brief. July 8, 2013.