Narrative Opinion Summary
The motion for reconsideration filed by Defendant-Appellee on May 17, 1993, is partially granted. The mandate on remand is clarified: the circuit court's prior decision to grant John C. Lewin's motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint was erroneous, as outlined in the plurality opinion from May 5, 1993. Consequently, the circuit court's order and judgment are vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings aligned with the plurality opinion. On remand, Lewin bears the burden to prove that HRS 572-1 is constitutional under the "strict scrutiny" standard by showing it serves compelling state interests and is narrowly tailored to minimize infringement on constitutional rights, referencing Nagle v. Board of Educ. and Holdman v. Olim. The motion is denied in all other aspects. Judge Heen filed a dissenting opinion and does not agree with the majority.
Legal Issues Addressed
Constitutional Law - Strict Scrutiny Standardsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: On remand, the defendant must prove the constitutionality of HRS 572-1 under the strict scrutiny standard, demonstrating compelling state interests and minimal infringement on constitutional rights.
Reasoning: On remand, Lewin bears the burden to prove that HRS 572-1 is constitutional under the 'strict scrutiny' standard by showing it serves compelling state interests and is narrowly tailored to minimize infringement on constitutional rights, referencing Nagle v. Board of Educ. and Holdman v. Olim.
Dissenting Opinion in Judicial Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Judge Heen filed a dissenting opinion, indicating disagreement with the majority's decision.
Reasoning: Judge Heen filed a dissenting opinion and does not agree with the majority.
Judgment on the Pleadingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The circuit court's decision to grant a motion for judgment on the pleadings was found to be erroneous, leading to vacating of the order and judgment.
Reasoning: The mandate on remand is clarified: the circuit court's prior decision to grant John C. Lewin's motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint was erroneous, as outlined in the plurality opinion from May 5, 1993.
Reconsideration of Judicial Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The motion for reconsideration filed by Defendant-Appellee was partially granted, indicating a review and modification of the previous court's decision.
Reasoning: The motion for reconsideration filed by Defendant-Appellee on May 17, 1993, is partially granted.