Haw. Rev. Stat. § 10-3
The purposes of the office of Hawaiian affairs include:
[L 1979, c 196, pt of §2; am L 1990, c 304, §§4, 16]
Ensuring Our Future by Protecting Our Past: An Indigenous Reconciliation Approach to Improving Native Hawaiian Burial Protection. 33 UH L. Rev. 321 (2010).
Reconciling Maoli Interests in a Haole Forum: Limitations to the U.S. Department of the Interior's Consultation Policy That Undermine Native Hawaiian Self-Determination. 46 UH L. Rev. 93 (2023).
Trustees of the office of Hawaiian affairs established as a matter of law that each of the challenged expenditures constituted a "use" "for one or more of the [§5(f)] purposes" and that was sufficient to defeat plaintiffs' 42 U.S.C. §1983 claim under federal law for breach of the [Admission Act] §5(f) trust; district court's summary judgment in favor of the trustees, affirmed. 616 F.3d 918 (2010).
Determination of whether damages received by State from illegal sand mining operation was funds derived from a public land trust was a nonjudicial discretion; whether income from sales, leases, or other dispositions of lands surrounding harbors on all major islands, of land on Sand Island, of land on Airport, fell within section was a nonjudicial discretion. 69 H. 154, 737 P.2d 446.
Act 304, L 1990, was invalidated by its own severability clause when amendments made to §§10-2 and 10-13.5 by Act 304 were found to conflict with the federal Forgiveness Act (Pub. L. No. 105-66, §340, 111 Stat. at 1448), leaving court with no judicially manageable standards to determine whether office of Hawaiian affairs was entitled to the specific revenues sought in the suit. 96 H. 388, 31 P.3d 901.
Plaintiffs' complaint failed to state a breach of fiduciary duty claim under §10-16(c) where the complaint: (1) did not allege that the office of Hawaiian affairs trustees' spending decisions were made for any purpose other than benefiting native Hawaiians; (2) did not allege that the expenditures were in conflict with or adverse to the interests of native Hawaiians; and (3) lacked factual allegations that the expenditures were in furtherance of programs that do not benefit native Hawaiians. 131 H. 62, 315 P.3d 213 (2013).