Opinion ID: 1405642
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: The plaintiffs-appellees' motion to alter the judgment

Text: On September 6, 1996, the plaintiffs-appellees moved to alter the judgment pursuant to Hawai`i Rules of Civil Procedure (HRCP) Rule 59 (1996). [14] The plaintiffs-appellees argued that the judgment should be amended: (1) to add the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos as a proper party defendant; (2) to increase the value of damages awarded to GBC to reflect the highest value of the gold during the time of the conversion; (3) to strike the judgment in favor of Imelda, inasmuch as GBC's claims of constructive trust and fraudulent conveyance against her had yet to be tried; and, accordingly, (4) to reserve jurisdiction on those claims as well with regard to the Marcos Estate. At the conclusion of the hearing on the motion, the circuit court ruled as follows: With regard to Imelda Marcos as a party to the remaining causes of action[,] the Court notes that[,] by way of its verdict, the jury has found that she was not legally responsible for any conversion. And a conversion is a condition precedent to establishing constructive trust or that there be fraudulent conveyance thereafter. And so the Court denies the plaintiffs' request to add Imelda Marcos as to the remaining causes of action. With regard to the matter of the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos, as counsel are well aware, at every juncture when the plaintiffs had attempted to add or substitute Irene Silverman as a representative of the Estate, this Court did not intend to suggest that the appropriate party defendant was the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos. And the Court refers counsel to the action taken by the Honorable Patrick Yim[,] who, pursuant to Rule 25, did substitute Imelda Marcos as a representative for the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos. So the Court will grant the Motion to Alter Judgment. And the judgment will reflect a judgment against the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos, Imelda Marcos as personal representative. With regard to the Motion to Alter judgment, with regard to the amount of damages returned by the jury, the Court stands on its prior ruling that the issue of the value of gold should be the value at the time of the conversion and not at the highest value reached. And the Court denies the Motion to Alter Judgment to reflect damages at the $860 an ounce amount. Accordingly, the circuit court entered judgment against Defendant Imelda Marcos, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos on the battery, false imprisonment, and conversion claims, by an amended judgment filed on October 21, 1996.