Background
The Board of Land and Natural Resources issued Resorttrust Hawaii, LLC, owner and operator of the Kahala Hotel, a revocable permit to use ceded lands fronting the hotel. When the Board considered renewing the permit for 2022, Tyler Ralston requested a contested case hearing and objected to permit conditions allowing the hotel to pre-set lounge chairs on the land. The Board denied his request and renewed the permit, and the circuit court affirmed.
The Intermediate Court of Appeals held that the renewal implicated Ralston’s constitutionally protected interest in a clean and healthful environment and that he was entitled to a contested case hearing. It nevertheless denied his request for private-attorney-general fees against Resorttrust because the relief available on remand remained uncertain. In a May 2026 opinion, the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court held that Ralston had satisfied the doctrine and remanded for the ICA to determine the reasonableness of the requested fees and Resorttrust’s liability. Ralston then sought $9,139.17 for work performed in the certiorari proceedings.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that Resorttrust was liable under the private attorney general doctrine for all reasonable fees Ralston incurred on certiorari. Resorttrust had actively opposed Ralston’s request for a contested case hearing and defended the Board’s decision throughout the proceedings, advancing its interests in extending its use of state lands. On certiorari, where the sole issue was the denial of fees against Resorttrust, only Resorttrust opposed Ralston’s application.
The court found counsel’s $450 hourly rate and 19.4346 hours reasonable, including time spent seeking fees. After correcting a negligible calculation error, it awarded Ralston $9,139.13, inclusive of general excise tax. The court also directed the ICA on remand to determine the reasonable fees for which Resorttrust is liable for the ICA proceedings, excluding work clearly identifiable as directed against the State.
Key Takeaways
- A private party may be liable for private-attorney-general fees when it actively advances its own interests in litigation that vindicates important public rights.
- Ralston could recover reasonable fees incurred in establishing and seeking his fee award, including “fees on fees.”
- Resorttrust must pay $9,139.13 for the certiorari proceedings, while the ICA must calculate its liability for reasonable fees incurred before that court.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that private-attorney-general fee liability is not confined to government defendants or to private parties accused of deception or unusually close collaboration with an agency. A private beneficiary that actively defends agency action and opposes the enforcement of public procedural rights may bear the reasonable cost of the resulting public-interest litigation.
The ruling also preserves compensation for the work required to obtain a fee award, reinforcing the doctrine’s role in making private enforcement of broadly applicable public-land protections financially feasible.