298 P.3d 1045
Haw.2013Background
- Hawaii contracted to renovate Lanakila Elementary School, including 476 jalousie windows; Allied Pacific held a C-5 license but no C-22 glazing license.
- Board allowed jalousie work under Allied Pacific's C-5 license, deeming it incidental and supplemental to remodeling work.
- DC 50 and Aloha Glass challenged, arguing cost and extent of the window work should determine license necessity; Allied Pacific had not listed a C-22 subcontractor.
- ICA majority held the Board’s interpretation of incidental and supplemental was improper; it deferred to agency interpretation.
- Hawaii Supreme Court reversed, holding the Board’s interpretation erroneous and not aligned with legislative purpose; remanded to reconsider based on cost and extent.
- Court clarified incidental and supplemental work is narrowly permitted and must reflect the statutory purpose of contractor licensing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether incidental and supplemental work exception applies | Petitioners: Board misinterpreted exception; costs/extent matter. | Lopez: Board properly allowed under C-5 license without C-22. | Board's interpretation is plainly erroneous |
| Must cost and extent constrain incidental and supplemental work | Incidental and supplemental defined broadly; cost irrelevant. | Board may treat incidental work as project-wide. | Cost and extent must be considered; Board erred by not weighing them |
| Relation to legislative purpose of licensing | Broader 'incidental and supplemental' undermines public safety goals. | Existing framework tolerates some unlicensed work as incidental. | Board's approach contravenes legislative purpose |
| Application of Okada Trucking precedent | Okada supports strict limits on general contractors; cannot expand unlicensed work. | Okada distinguishes incidental work but not its price/cost scope here. | Okada governs; here Board erred in applying it |
Key Cases Cited
- Okada Trucking Co., Ltd. v. Bd. of Water Supply, 97 Hawaii 450 (Haw. 2002) (set limits on general contractors; incidental work must be narrow)
- Okada Trucking Co., Ltd. v. Bd. of Water Supply, 99 Hawaii 191, 99 Hawaii 191 (Haw. 2002) (mootness exception for public interest questions)
- Jones v. Phillipson, 92 Hawaii 117 (Haw. 1999) (statutory purpose of licensing to protect public)