Akau v. Olohana Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiffs had standing to challenge action affecting their public right of way to the beach and characterizing the injury as a \recreational interest\
• holding that plaintiffs had standing to challenge action affecting their public right of way to the beach and characterizing the injury as a “recreational interest”
• holding that plaintiffs had standing to assert a public nuisance claim and seek injunctive or declaratory relief
• explaining that “[a] judgment in a class action consisting of the people actually injured will bind the members who are all those allowed to sue[ ]”
• recognizing for standing purposes that injuries to recreational interests are cognizable
• an injury to a recreational interest is an injury in fact sufficient to constitute standing to assert the rights of the public for purposes of declaratory and injunctive relief

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).