No. 25-507

Chang Y. Aiona, V. v. County of Hawaii, Hawaii, et al.

Lower Court: Hawaii
Docketed: 2025-10-23
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: defamation first-amendment legal-precedent milkovich-standard opinion-exception public-interest
Key Terms:
FirstAmendment
Latest Conference: 2026-01-23
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the 'opinion' exception can be extended to a private, non-public interest, defamation lawsuit in violation of the Court's decision Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., et al., 497 U.S. 1, 110 S.Ct. 2695, 111 L.Ed.2d 1 (1990)?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Whether the “opi nion” excepti on can be extended to a pri vate, non-publ ic interest, defamati on lawsui t in violation of the Court’s deci sion Milkovi ch v. Lorai n Journal Co., et al ., 497 U .S. 1, 110 S.Ct. 2695, 111 L.Ed.2d 1 (1990)?

Docket Entries

2026-01-26
Petition DENIED.
2026-01-16
Reply of Chang Y. Aiona, V. submitted.
2026-01-16
Reply of petitioner Chang Y. Aiona, V. filed. (Distributed)
2026-01-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/23/2026.
2025-12-30
Motion of Chang Y. Aiona, V. for an extension of time submitted.
2025-12-23
Brief of County of Hawaii, et al. in opposition submitted.
2025-12-23
Brief of respondents County of Hawaii, et al. in opposition filed.
2025-12-23
Brief of respondents County of Hawaii, Hawaii, et al. in opposition filed.
2025-11-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 24, 2025.
2025-11-18
Motion of County of Hawaii, et al. for an extension of time submitted.
2025-11-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 24, 2025 to December 24, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
2025-10-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 24, 2025)

Attorneys

Chang Y. Aiona, V.
Ted H. S. HongTed H. S. Hong, Attorney at Law, LLLC, Petitioner
Ted H. S. HongTed H. S. Hong, Attorney at Law, LLLC, Petitioner
County of Hawaii, et al.
Lerisa L. HeroldtOffice of the Corporation Counsel, Respondent
Lerisa L. HeroldtOffice of the Corporation Counsel, Respondent
Mark Damian DisherOffice of the Corporation Counsel, Respondent
Mark Damian DisherOffice of the Corporation Counsel, Respondent