Hawai'i Legal News

  Haynes v. Haas (HSC May 5, 2020) Background. Shadley Haynes was seriously injured by a Gregory Fowler Haas, a homeless man living in a storage unit. The injury occurred outside Haynes’ bar located less than a mile from Haas’s storage unit. Haynes filed a complaint against Haas, Clark Realty Corp., Kona Metro Parking & Watchmen Services, Allied Self Storage, and other properties and entities. The complaint averred that the defendants created a public nuisance by allowing Haas and others to live in one of the storage units in violation of the Hawai'i County zoning laws and that Hayes suffered serious injury as a result of this nuisance. Allied Self Storage filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that it owed no duty to Shadley and that it had no knowledge that people were living in storage units. The circuit court, with the Hon. Judge Ronald Ibarra presiding, granted the motions and awarded costs to the defendants. Haynes appealed. The ICA affirmed.   The...

Ralston v. Yim (ICA May 31, 2012) Background. Rick Ralston sued Dr. Errol Yim for dental malpractice. Before the discovery cut-off date, Dr. Yim filed a motion to dismiss and/or for summary judgment. Dr. Yim argued that Ralston could not prove his malpractice claim because he had not disclosed any expert witnesses. Ralston responded by arguing that Dr. Yim had not met its initial burden of showing no genuine issue of fact, particularly the fact that Dr. Yim's orthodontic care comported with accepted standards of care and that Dr. Yim adequately obtained Ralston's informed consent. Ralston also pointed out that the discovery cutoff had not occurred. At the first hearing, the circuit court permitted supplemental briefing on the issue. Ralston attached a report from an expert, Dr. Harry Aronowitz, and Dr. Aronowitz's c.v. The affidavit stated that in his expert opinion, Dr. Yim's orthodontic care fell below the standard of care. Dr. Yim did not supplement its motions, ...

Royal Kunia Community Association v. Nemoto (ICA November 28, 2008) Background. The Nemotos lived in a planned residential community where a restrictive covenant ran with the land. The covenant stated that any "improvement" to the property was subject to the approval of a design committee; there was, however, a provision allowing "landscaping" without approval. The Nemotos sought approval to pour a slab of cement around their home. The committee approved only part of their plan and asked for more specific plans. However, the Nemotos laid the cement in front of their house, poured gravel over the cement, and deemed it a "Japanese rock garden." Months later the Community Association requested the Nemotos weigh a truck parked on their property. The covenant prohibited any trucks weighing with more a one-ton capacity near any of the lots. The Nemotos did not respond to the request and the Association investigated the weight of the truck and determine...

Kamaka v. Goodsill, Anderson, Quinn & Stifel (HSC Jan. 24, 2008) Background. Kamaka was an attorney at Goodsill, a law firm in HNL, focusing on employment law. The firm suspected Kamaka's honesty when it discovered that she had not completed the work she claimed to have finished. Soon afterwards, another attorney at the firm believed that she had regularly made entries on billing time sheets for incomplete work, and recommended termination. Kamaka's annual report was not favorable so the firm put her on probation pending further investigation. The firm also informed Kamaka that if investigation showed that "continued deficiencies" between the billing and actual work done, she would be fired. Kamaka was eventually terminated, and the firm referred her to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. The ODC dismissed the claim based on insufficient evidence. Kamaka sued Goodsill alleging several counts. Kamaka lost every claim one except for a jury awarding her for...