Dejean v. Nago.

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCEC-14-0001285
04-DEC-2014
09:45 AM
SCEC-14-0001285
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
KHISTINA CALDWELL DEJEAN, Plaintiff,
vs.
SCOTT NAGO, Chief Election Officer; OFFICE OF ELECTIONS;
and AARON SCHULANER, Defendants.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND JUDGMENT
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
On November 7, 2014, plaintiff Khistina Caldwell DeJean
(“DeJean”) filed a document entitled “Election Challen[g]e 2014,”
which we view as an election complaint to contest the November
2014 general election. On November 17, 2014, defendant Scott
Nago (“Nago”), Chief Election Officer of the State of Hawai#i,
the Office of Elections, and Aaron Schulaner (“Schulaner”)
(collectively, “Defendants”) filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint. On November 21, 2014, DeJean filed a reply
memorandum. Upon consideration of the election complaint, the
motion to dismiss, and the reply memorandum, and having heard
this matter without oral argument and in accordance with HRS
§ 11-174.5(b) (2009) (requiring the supreme court to “give
judgment, stating all findings of fact and of law”), we set forth
the following findings of fact and conclusions of law and enter
the following judgment.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. DeJean was not listed on the November 4, 2014
general election ballot as a candidate for any office.
2. DeJean contests the general election by filing
a complaint in the supreme court on November 7, 2014. DeJean
names Nago, the Office of Elections, and Schulaner as defendants.
3. The complaint references a Pennsylvania statute,
cites several case law and HRS § 12-6, and includes a heading
entitled “Jury Verdicts & Settlements.”
4. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for
(a) lack of standing and, in the alternative, (b) failure to
state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
5. In response to the motion to dismiss, DeJean
requests, among other things, a special election and that
Defendants Nago and Schulaner, together with Attorney General
David Louie, be fired or jailed immediately.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I.
1. HRS § 11-172 (2009) requires an election contest
to be brought by “any candidate, or qualified political party
directly interested, or any thirty voters of any election
district.”
2. The record indicates that DeJean was not listed on
2
the ballot as a candidate for any office in the November 4, 2014
general election, is not a qualified political party, and does
not comprise thirty voters of an election district.
3. DeJean, therefore, lacks standing to contest the
November 4, 2014 general election.
II.
4. When reviewing a motion to dismiss a complaint for
failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the
court must accept the plaintiff’s allegations as true and view
them in the light most favorable to him or her; dismissal is
proper only if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can
prove no set of facts in support of his or her claim that would
entitle him or her to relief. AFL Hotel & Restaurant Workers
Health & Welfare Trust Fund v. Bosque, 110 Hawai#i 318, 321, 132
P.3d 1229, 1232 (2006).
5. A complaint challenging the results of a general
election pursuant to HRS § 11-172 fails to state a claim unless
the plaintiff demonstrates errors, mistakes or irregularities
that would change the outcome of the election. Tataii v. Cronin,
119 Hawai#i 337, 339, 198 P.3d 124, 126 (2008); Akaka v. Yoshina,
84 Hawai#i 383, 387, 935 P.2d 98, 102 (1997); Funakoshi v. King,
65 Haw. 312, 317, 651 P.2d 912, 915 (1982); Elkins v. Ariyoshi,
56 Haw. 47, 48, 527 P.2d 236, 237 (1974).
6. A plaintiff challenging a general election must
show that he or she has actual information of mistakes or errors
sufficient to change the result. Tataii, 119 Hawai#i at 339, 198
3
P.3d at 126; Akaka, 84 Hawai#i at 388, 935 P.2d at 103;
Funakoshi, 65 Haw. at 316-317, 651 P.2d at 915.
7. DeJean has failed to present specific facts or
actual information of mistakes, errors, or irregularities
sufficient to change the results of the general election. Taking
DeJean’s allegations as true and viewing them in the light most
favorable to her, DeJean can prove no set of facts that would
entitle her to any type of relief from the results of the general
election.
8. Therefore, DeJean fails to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.
JUDGMENT
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and
conclusions of law, judgment is entered dismissing the complaint.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, December 4, 2014.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
4