Oral Arguments before the Hawai`i Supreme Court
NO. 27602 Thursday, November 20, 2008 – 9:00 a.m.
MERVYN RAPOZO, Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. BETTER HEARING OF HAWAI`I, LLC, Respondent/Defendant-Appellant.
Attorney(s) for Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellee(s)
Joe P. Moss
Attorney(s) for Respondent/Defendant-Appellant(s)
Michele-Lynn E Luke (Kessner Umebayashi Bain & Matsunaga)
COURT: RTYM, CJ; SHL, PAN, SRA & JED, 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.
Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellee Mervyn Rapozo (Rapozo) filed an Application for Writ of Certiorari (Application) urging this court to review the decision of the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) in Rapozo v. Better Hearing of Hawai`i, LLC, 118 Hawai`i 285, 188 P.3d 799 (App. 2008). In Rapozo, the ICA reversed the final judgment of the District Court of the Fifth Circuit (court) and held in favor of Respondent/Defendant-Appellant Better Hearing of Hawai`i, LLC (Better Hearing). In his Application, Rapozo argues that the ICA gravely erred in concluding (1) that the court was clearly erroneous in finding that the subject hearing aids were not fit for their ordinary purpose under Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) section 481k (the Assistive Technology Warranty Act, or “the Act”); (2) that the court was clearly erroneous in finding that Rapozo had given Better Hearing a reasonable opportunity to repair the hearing aids; (3) that the court was clearly erroneous in finding that the adjustments to Rapozo’s hearing aids constituted repairs in the context of the Act; and (4) that the case need not be remanded for an award of damages under HRS Chapter 480 based on Better Hearing’s “unfair or deceptive practice[s]”.