In re Appeal of Krafft

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 30168 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I In the Matter of the Appeal from the Hawai#i State Bar Association s Administrative Suspension of MAHEALANI KRAFFT ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ORDER DENYING ATTORNEY MAHEALANI KRAFFT S APPEAL FROM THE HAWAI<I STATE BAR ASSOCIATION S ADMINISTRATIVE SUSPENSION (By: Moon, C.J., for the court1) Upon consideration of Attorney Mahealani Krafft s Appeal from the Hawai<i State Bar Association s Administrative Suspension, the exhibits thereto, and the record, it appears: (1) RSCH 1.14(a) requires each person licensed to practice law after July 1, 2001 to complete a Hawai<i Professionalism course no later than December 31 of the year following the year of election of active status; (2) when Krafft passed the bar examination in 2007, she received a registration packet and elected active status; (3) by electing active status in 2007, Krafft was required by RSCH 1.14(a) to complete a Hawai<i Professionalism course by December 31, 2008; (4) on June 26, 2008, the Hawai<i State Bar Association notified Krafft that the next Hawai<i Professionalism course was scheduled for November 21, 2008; (5) Krafft did not complete a Hawai<i Professionalism 1 Considered by: Moon, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and Recktenwald, JJ. course by December 31, 2008; and (6) having failed to complete a Hawai<i Professionalism course by December 31, 2008, Kraft was administratively suspended, pursuant to RSCH 1.14(c), in 2009. It further appears that no appeal is authorized from a RSCH 1.14(c) administrative suspension and if we review the "appeal" pursuant to our inherent power to regulate the practice of law, Krafft fails to show good cause as to why she failed to know and comply with the requirements of RSCH 1.14. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Mahealani Krafft s appeal from the administrative suspension of her license to practice law pursuant to Rule 1.14 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai<i is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai<i, December 7, 2009. FOR THE COURT: Chief Justice -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.