Court Opinion

ID: 9781774
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 17:31:53.989579+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:13:52.885282
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
MOON, C.J.,
in which NAKAYAMA, J., joins.
I respectfully dissent. In the present case, the majority notes that “[i]t is arguable that the [Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) ] erred” in its interpretation of Peters v. Weatherwax, 69 Haw. 21, 731 P.2d 157 (1987). Majority Opinion, 101 Hawai'i at 470, 71 P.3d at 421. Nevertheless, the majority concludes that “any error in this regard is harmless under the particular circumstances of this ease” and goes on the interpret Ha-wai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 346-37 (Supp.1997) in a manner consistent with both Peters and the ICA’s disposition in the present case. Majority Opinion at 11-17. Therefore, unlike State v. Hanson, 97 Hawai'i 71, 73, 34 P.3d 1, 3 (2001) and Korsak v. Hawai‘i Permanente Medical Group, 94 Hawai'i 297, 300, 12 P.3d 1238 (2000), the present case does not contain grave errors or obvious inconsistencies dictating the need for any clarification by this court. See HRS § 602-59 (1993). Accordingly, I would dismiss cer-tiorari as improvidently granted.