Case Title: Ranger Insurance Company v. Hinshaw

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2003-12-18T00:00:00Z

Document:
NO. 22532 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I RANGER INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee vs. SHU HUA KAO HINSHAW, Real Party in Interest-Appellant and JUAN RAMON RIVAS, KYOKO TAKEDA, DAVID REARDON, STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY, JOHN DOES 1-10, DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10, DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10, Defendants (CIV. NO. 98-0477) ----------------------------------------------------------------- STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, AN Illinois Corporation, Plaintiff vs. FRANK HINSHAW; JUAN RAMON RIVAS; SKYDIVE ACADEMY OF HAWAII CORPORATION, dba SKYDIVE HAWAII; and KYOKO TAKEDA, Defendants (CIV. NO. 98-0159) APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT (CIV. NOS. 98-0477 and 98-159) ORDER OF AMENDMENT (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.) The Opinion of the Court filed on November 14, 2003, is hereby amended as follows (amended material in bold): 1. PAGE 6, LINE 5 from the TOP of the page: (3) Ranger was “entitled to reimbursement of attorney’s fees and costs in the defense of the underlying case[,]” and (4) “Ranger be awarded its costs, reasonably [sic] attorney’s fees, and such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.” 2 2. PAGE 14, LINE 5 from the BOTTOM of the page following the sentence: “It is undisputed that the insurance policy is a contract between Skydive and Ranger.” Add: Moreover, Ranger’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs for the defense it provided in Takeda’s lawsuit constitutes a request for consequential damages. See S. Utsunomiya Enters., Inc., 76 Hawai#i at 401, 879 P.2d at 506 (holding that “attorneys’ fees incurred in defending an attack on title against a third party would be recoverable as consequential damages in a corresponding breach of covenant action against the grantor of the ‘defective’ property”). 3. PAGE 14, LINE 5 from the BOTTOM of the page: Thus, Ranger’s declaratory action is in the nature of assumpsit, The Dissenting Opinion by Acoba, J. is hereby amended as follows (amended material in bold): 1. PAGE 1, LINE 5 from the TOP of the page reads: “See majority opinion at 15.” It is amended to read: See majority opinion at 15-16. 2. PAGE 1, LINE 7 from the BOTTOM of the page reads: “See majority opinion at 8-11.” It is amended to read: See majority opinion at 10-11. 3. PAGE 1, NOTE 1, LINE 7 from the TOP of note 1 reads: “See majority opinion at 15.” It is amended to read: See majority opinion at 15-16. 4. PAGE 1, NOTE 1. LINE 1, from the bottom of the note reads: “See majority opinion at 15.” It is amended to read: See majority opinion at 16. An amended opinion is being filed concurrently with this order, incorporating the foregoing amendments. The Clerk of the Court is directed to provide a copy of this order and a copy of the amended opinion to the parties and notify the publishing agencies of the changes. The Clerk of the Court is further 3 instructed to distribute copies of this order of amendment to those who received the previously filed opinion. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i,December 18, 2003.