Oral Arguments before the Hawai`i Supreme Court
NO. 27237 – Thursday, August 7, 2008 – 9:00 a.m.
CV 03-1-0215: IRENE KATO and RALPH KATO, Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs. FREDERIC FUNARI, Defendant-Appellee, and JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10; DOE NON-PROFIT ENTITIES 1-10; and DOE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants-Appellees.
CV 02-1-0470: NANCY HIWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. FREDERIC FUNARI, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee, and IRENE KATO, Third-Party Defendant-Appellee.
(Motor Vehicle Tort)
Attorney(s) for Petitioners/Plaintiffs-Appellant(s)
Ian L. Mattoch and Stuart M. Kodish
Attorney(s) for Respondent/Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee(s)
Dean E. Ochiai, Brenda Morris Hoernig, Shannon L. Wack and Randall Y. Kaya
COURT: RTYM, CJ; SHL, PAN, SRA & JED, JJ.
Petitioner/plaintiff-appellant Irene Kato’s application for a writ of certiorari to review the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ (ICA) February 12, 2008 judgment on appeal, entered pursuant to its January 29, 2008 summary disposition order (SDO), was accepted on April 22, 2008. In its SDO, the ICA affirmed, inter alia, the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit’s December 8, 2004 judgment entered in favor of respondent/defendant-appellee Frederic Funari after a jury trial.
Briefly stated, the crux of this case — which arose from a motor vehicle accident between Kato and Funari that occurred in Kahului, on the island of Maui, Hawai#i — centers around an alleged discrepancy between the jury instructions and the special verdict form that raised questions regarding the amount of damages awarded and the effect of the apportionment between Kato’s pre-existing injuries and the injuries sustained in the accident. Kato contends in her application that the trial court misconstrued the special verdict in Funari’s favor and that the ICA gravely erred in affirming the trial court’s construction.