Skip to Main Nav Skip to Main Content Skip to Footer Content

Eviction moratorium on Maui Island ended on Feb. 4, 2025. For updates, click here.

Oral Arguments before the Intermediate Court of Appeals

NO. 28010 – Wednesday, August 12, 2009 – 9 a.m.

COMMUNICATIONS-PACIFIC, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU; MARY PATRICIA WATERHOUSE, Director of the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services and Chief Procurement Officer, in her official capacity; TORU HAMAYASU, Chief Planner, Transportation Planning Division, Department of Transportation Services and Acting Deputy Director of the Department of Transportation Services, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees, and JOHN DOES 1-5; JANE DOES 1-5; and DOE ENTITIES 1-5, Defendants.

Attorney(s) for Defendant-Appellant
Terry E. Thomason, Corianne W. Lau and Peter S. Knapman (Alston Hunt Floyd & Ing)

Attorney(s) for Plaintiff-Appellee
Bert T. Kobayashi, Jr., Jonathan A. Kobayashi and Brendan S. Bailey (Kobayashi, Sugita & Goda)

NOTE: Certificate of Recusal by Judge Katherine G. Leonard, filed 6/4/09.

NOTE: Notice assigning Judge Craig H. Nakamura in place of Judge Leonard, entered on 6/4/09.

COURT: Watanabe, Nakamura & Fujise, JJ.

SPECIAL NOTE: The above argument will take place in the Supreme Court courtroom on the Second Floor of Ali`iolani Hale, 417 South King Street, Honolulu, Hawai`i.

[ Listen to the entire audio recording in mp3 format ]

Brief description:

Plaintiff-Appellant Communications-Pacific (Comm-Pac) appeals from the May 10, 2006 final judgment of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit in favor of Defendants-Appellees (collectively, City), dismissing with prejudice Comm-Pac’s claims for (1) a declaratory ruling that the City violated Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 103D (the Procurement Code) and (2) tortious interference with prospective business advantage.

Comm-Pac argues that the Procurement Code’s exclusive remedy provision (HRS § 103D-704) does not bar Comm-Pac’s tort claim. Comm-Pac was listed as a sub-contractor on a contractor’s response to the City’s request for professional services to conduct an alternative analysis and prepare an environmental impact statement for a high capacity transportation alternative for O`ahu. Although Comm-Pac’s contractor was selected and entered into an agreement for professional services with the City, Comm-Pac claimed the City directed or required the contractor to include a new sub-contractor to do virtually all of the work Comm-Pac would have done under the contractor’s proposal.

Chat

KolokoloChat

How can I help you today?

×