Skip to Content

Important: JIMS/JEFS Downtime

Judiciary systems including JEFS, eCourt Kokua, and Document Drop-off will be unavailable due to maintenance work beginning midnight Friday, September 23, to noon, Sunday, September 25. If work is completed sooner, systems may be restored earlier. Applications, including eReminder, eJuror, and eTraffic will not be affected. Thank you for your patience and understanding.


Oral Argument Before the Intermediate Court of Appeals

No. CAAP-12-0000582, Wednesday, November 18, 2015, 9 a.m.

KEIKO MOKIAO, Claimant-Appellee, vs. ATTRACTIONS HAWAII, Employer-Appellant, and HAWAII EMPLOYERS’ MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Insurance Carrier-Appellant.

The above-captioned case has been set for argument on the merits at:

Supreme Court Courtroom
Ali`iolani Hale, 2nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813

Attorney(s) for Claimant-Appellee Keiko Mokiao:

Jeffrey M. Taylor

Attorney(s) for Employer-Appellant Attractions Hawaii and Insurance Carrier-Appellant Hawaii Employers’ Mutual Insurance Company, Inc.: Robert E. McKee, Jr. of the Law Office of Robert E. McKee, Jr.

COURT: Foley, Reifurth and Ginoza, JJ.

[ Listen to the entire audio recording in mp3 format ]

Brief Description:

Employer-Appellant Attractions Hawaii and Insurance Carrier-Appellant Hawaii Employers’ Mutual Insurance Company, Inc. (collectively, “Appellants”) appeal from the Decision and Order entered on May 22, 2012 by the Labor and Industrial Relations Appeals Board (“Board”).

In its May 22, 2012 Decision and Order, the Board held that the workers’ compensation claim that Mokiao submitted on April 17, 2009 — alleging that she incurred latent psychological injuries of “stress” and “depression” as a result of the physical injuries to Mokiao’s right shoulder caused by a May 18, 2006 workplace injury, for which the Appellants were found to be liable –- was timely filed under Hawaii Revised Statutes (“HRS”) § 386-82 (1993), and that Appellants are liable to Mokiao under that claim. The Board also determined that Appellants received insufficient pre-hearing notice that the Board would determine Mokiao’s percent Permanent Partial Disability (“PPD”) during its hearing on her psychological injury claim, so the Board vacated a previous PPD award and remanded.

On appeal, the Appellants contend that the Board erred when it concluded that:

(1) Appellants are liable for the psychiatric injury as a result of, or as a compensable consequence to, the May 18, 2006 right shoulder injury;

(2) Appellants are liable for medical care, services, and supplies for the psychiatric injury; and

(3) The vacated PPD award should be remanded.