Case Title: Thompson v. Kyo-Ya Company, Ltd.

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2006-11-20T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

 

000:

LETIZIA THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellant

KYO-YA COMPANY, LTD., dba SHERATON-MAUI HOTEL,
befendant-Appeliee

 

and
JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10;
and DOE GOVERNMENTAL

DOE NON-PROFIT ENTITIES 1-10;
ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants

 

No. 26040

ORDER OF AMENDMENT
(crv. No. 02-1-0209)

1€2 Ha 02 AONsee

 

NOVEMBER 20, 2006

RCOBA AND DUFFY, JJ.

The concurring opinion of Acoba, J., with whom Duffy,

J., joined, appended to the majority opinion of the court filed
on Novenber 9, 2006, is amended as follows (addition is double

underscored) :
‘The last sentence of the first paragraph on page 4:

the word “not” is added between the words “would” and “be” so

that the sentence reads: “Thus, under the Crichfield test her
subjective intent was not to engage in an ‘exclusively

recreational purpose’ and her claim would pot be precluded under

the HRUS.”

aatis
‘The Clerk of the Court is directed to incorporate the

foregoing change in the original opinion and take all n

 

sary

steps to notify the publishing agencies of this change.

Bah

Gorm, Ducted +