418 P.3d 671 (Hawai‘i 2018), SCAP-16-0000508, The Malulani Group, Ltd. v. Kaupo Ranch, Ltd.

Docket Nº:SCAP-16-0000508
Citation:418 P.3d 671, 142 Hawai’i 330
Party Name:THE MALULANI GROUP, LIMITED fka Magoon Brothers, Ltd., a Hawai‘i corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KAUPO RANCH, LTD., a Hawai‘i corporation, Defendant-Appellant, and Heirs and/or Devisees of Hamole aka Marie Hamole et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Attorney:Joachim P. Cox, Robert K. Fricke, Kamala S. Haake, Cox Fricke LLP, Honolulu, for Plaintiff-Appellee. Brian R. Jenkins, Jenkins & Jenkins, Wailuku, for Defendant-Appellant.
Judge Panel:Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ., and Circuit Judge Crandall, in place of Nakayama, J., recused)
Case Date:May 21, 2018
Court:Supreme Court of Hawai'i
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 671

418 P.3d 671 (Hawai‘i 2018)

142 Hawai’i 330

THE MALULANI GROUP, LIMITED fka Magoon Brothers, Ltd., a Hawai‘i corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

KAUPO RANCH, LTD., a Hawai‘i corporation, Defendant-Appellant,

and

Heirs and/or Devisees of Hamole aka Marie Hamole et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. SCAP-16-0000508

Supreme Court of Hawai‘i

May 21, 2018

Editorial Note:

This decision has been designated as "Unpublished disposition." in the Pacific Reporter. See HI R RAP RULE 35

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT (CAAP-16-0000508; CIV. NO. 08-1-0501(3) )

Joachim P. Cox, Robert K. Fricke, Kamala S. Haake, Cox Fricke LLP, Honolulu, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Brian R. Jenkins, Jenkins & Jenkins, Wailuku, for Defendant-Appellant.

Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ., and Circuit Judge Crandall, in place of Nakayama, J., recused)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER

On interlocutory appeal, Defendant-Appellee Kaupo Ranch, Ltd. (Kaupo Ranch or the Ranch) challenges the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit’s June 8, 2016 "Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Filed April 28, 2016." The circuit court granted partial summary judgment to Plaintiff-Appellee The Malulani Group (Malulani Group or the Group) on remand from a decision by the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) in Malulani Group’s favor on two issues relating to the existence of an implied easement from a landlocked parcel on Maui to the nearest road. See Malulani Grp., Ltd. v. Kaupo Ranch, Ltd., 133 Hawai‘i 425, 329 P.3d 330 (App. 2014). The parcel1 is owned by the Malulani Group. The easement would run across property owned by the Ranch. We accepted transfer of Kaupo Ranch’s interlocutory appeal of the grant of partial summary judgment to Malulani. We affirm the circuit court’s grant of partial summary judgment on remand. Id. at 436, 329 P.3d at 341

The ICAs decision involved two issues. First, Kaupo Ranch had argued that only private ownership of the parcels prior to severance can satisfy the first element of an implied easement, not government ownership. In a case of first impression in Hawaii, the ICA held...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP