No. SCWC-20-0000172, Tuesday, April 8, 2025, 9 a.m.

CARRIE N. NOBORIKAWA, Petitioner/Claimant-Appellant/Appellant, vs. HOST INTERNATIONAL, INC., Respondent/Employer-Appellee/Appellee, and ACE INSURANCE CO., adjusted by Corvel Corporation, Respondent/Insurance Carrier-Appellee/Appellee.

[ Listen to the audio recording in MP3 format ]

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

Supreme Court Courtroom
Ali‘iōlani Hale, 2^nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813

The oral argument will also be livestreamed for public viewing via the Judiciary’s YouTube channel at YouTube.com/hawaiicourts and ‘Ōlelo Community Television 55 (olelo.org/tv-schedule).

Attorney for Petitioner/Claimant-Appellant/Appellant CARRIE N. NOBORIKAWA:

     Wayne H. Mukaida

Attorneys for Respondent/Employer-Appellee/Appellee HOST INTERNATIONAL, INC. and Insurance Carrier-Appellee-Appellee ACE INSURANCE CO., adjusted by Corvel Corporation:

     Jacqueline W. S. Amai of the Law Office of Jacqueline W.S. Amai

NOTE: Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 02/04/25.

NOTE: Order granting motion to continue to later date filed 02/21/25.

NOTE: Amended Notice of Setting for Oral Argument, now rescheduled to 04/08/25 at 9:00 AM, filed 02/21/25.

COURT: Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, Eddins, Ginoza, and Devens, JJ.

Brief Description:

This case involves an appeal from a Labor Relations Appeals Board (LIRAB) workers’ compensation partial permanent disability (PPD) decision.

In 2007, Petitioner Noborikawa suffered a bilateral knee injury while working for Respondent Host International, Inc. as an airport restaurant and bar manager.  A doctor determined Noborikawa had a 5% impairment of the right knee, and 0% impairment of the left knee.  The Department of Labor and Industrial Relations (DLIR) Disability Compensation Division (DCD) determined Noborikawa had a PPD of 7% of the right knee and 0% of the left knee.

Noborikawa appealed to LIRAB.  She argued that she should have received a 20% PPD rating for her right knee and 7% rating for her left knee.  The LIRAB majority awarded 8% for the right knee and 3% for the left knee.  LIRAB’s chair dissented.  He stated he would have awarded 20% for the right knee, and 5% for the left knee.

Noborikawa appealed to the ICA.  She argued that LIRAB (1) failed to consider her permanent disability preventing her from returning to her former restaurant and bar manager duties; (2) failed to sufficiently explain how it reached its PPD decision; (3) erroneously relied on her vocational rehabilitation and re-employment as a medical coder or biller to award a lower PPD; and (4) improperly conflated PPD awards with Temporary Total Disability indemnity benefits in contravention of Hawaiʻi Supreme Court precedent, Ihara v. State of Hawaiʻi, Department of Land and Natural Resources.

The ICA affirmed LIRAB’s decision.  It held that LIRAB did not err in its decision-making and sufficiently explained how it reached its PPD award.  Noborikawa argues to this court that the ICA gravely erred.