{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-17","fingerprint":"ewai:us:e7344b","proof":"sha256:199f539f281923842727648327b9eec07e32c9cd5c6793bd99dba2383c83d836","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"","paragraphs":["para_1"]},{"title":"Electronically Filed","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Supreme Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"SCWC-20-0000727","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"01-JUL-2025","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"09:12 AM","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Dkt. 19 OP","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI","paragraphs":["para_9"]},{"title":"ROLAND S. GUIEB, individually and derivatively on behalf of","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"GUIEB INCORPORATED, Respondent/Plaintiff/Counterclaim","paragraphs":["para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19"]},{"title":"PACIFIC WELDING AND MANUFACTURING, LLC;","paragraphs":["para_21","para_22"]},{"title":"SCWC-20-0000727","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(CAAP-20-0000727; CASE NO. 1CC171001045)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"JULY 1, 2025","paragraphs":["para_27"]},{"title":"WITH CIRCUIT JUDGE VIOLA IN PLACE OF DEVENS, J., RECUSED","paragraphs":["para_29","para_30"]},{"title":"Two brothers ran an automotive business together. Robert","paragraphs":["para_32","para_33","para_34"]},{"title":"Roland sued Robert after Robert made decisions Roland","paragraphs":["para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39"]},{"title":"Roland alleged unfair and deceptive trade practices (UDAP)","paragraphs":["para_41"]},{"title":"Statutes (HRS) § 480-2 (2008), and deceptive trade practices","paragraphs":["para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46"]},{"title":"Hawaii.”","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"The circuit court granted Robert’s motion for partial","paragraphs":["para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53"]},{"title":"2","paragraphs":["para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62"]},{"title":"Last, Roland claimed that Robert breached a fiduciary duty","paragraphs":["para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70"]},{"title":"Both brothers appealed. The ICA reversed the circuit court","paragraphs":["para_72"]},{"title":"First, the ICA held that Roland’s UDAP claim (count 12)","paragraphs":["para_74","para_75","para_76"]},{"title":"Second, the ICA held that the jury should have considered","paragraphs":["para_78","para_79"]},{"title":"3","paragraphs":["para_81"]},{"title":"Roland, and because the jury found in Roland’s favor on the","paragraphs":["para_83","para_84","para_85"]},{"title":"Last, the ICA agreed with Roland - brotherhood created a","paragraphs":["para_87","para_88","para_89"]},{"title":"Robert’s representations. They may have found that Robert only","paragraphs":["para_91"]},{"title":"Roland that the ownership imbalance would not affect the","paragraphs":["para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99"]},{"title":"We agree with the ICA that the jury should have considered","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Roland’s count 12 claims and punitive damages. But we disagree","paragraphs":["para_102"]},{"title":"The ICA correctly reversed the circuit court’s dismissal of","paragraphs":["para_104"]},{"title":"UDAP claim and diverge from the ICA there, Roland presented","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"4","paragraphs":["para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110"]},{"title":"Next, we agree with the ICA that punitive damages should","paragraphs":["para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117"]},{"title":"(Guieb Group), (2) taking employees from Guieb Inc. to benefit","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Guieb Group, (3) reducing Roland’s salary, and (4) making Guieb","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Inc. pay most advertising costs (to the benefit of Guieb Group)","paragraphs":["para_121","para_122"]},{"title":"Thus, we affirm the ICA’s conclusion that the circuit court","paragraphs":["para_124"]},{"title":"Last, we disagree with the ICA that Robert had a fiduciary","paragraphs":["para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129"]},{"title":"In the 1980s, Robert Guieb asked his older brother, Roland","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Guieb, to work with him. They registered Guieb Inc. in 1991 and","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"5","paragraphs":["para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139"]},{"title":"Guieb Inc. opened its first shop in Waipahu in 1985. That","paragraphs":["para_141","para_142","para_143"]},{"title":"The brothers’ relationship began to fracture in 2011. In","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"2014, Robert established his own entity, Guieb Group LLC (Guieb","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Group), to sell and service mufflers. Guieb Group used the","paragraphs":["para_147"]},{"title":"Robert of stealing Guieb Inc.’s trade name and intentionally","paragraphs":["para_149","para_150"]},{"title":"In 2016, Robert canceled Guieb Inc.’s monthly lease at the","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"King Street Shop. Guieb Group, which Robert wholly owned, took","paragraphs":["para_153"]},{"title":"Guieb Inc.’s expenses. Roland accused Robert of “stealing” the","paragraphs":["para_155"]},{"title":"Roland alleged that Robert implemented arbitrary policy","paragraphs":["para_157"]},{"title":"6","paragraphs":["para_159","para_160","para_161"]},{"title":"Roland’s salary. Robert also claimed Roland misappropriated","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Guieb Inc.’s funds for his personal use. As a result, Robert","paragraphs":["para_164","para_165","para_166"]},{"title":"In June 2018, Roland, individually and derivatively on","paragraphs":["para_168","para_169"]},{"title":"(Robert’s wholly owned company), Guieb Group, and RSG","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Enterprises as defendants. Relevant to this appeal, Roland","paragraphs":["para_172","para_173","para_174"]},{"title":"Count 4 of Roland’s amended complaint alleged “Breaches of","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Fiduciary Duties Arising Out of Kinship.” Roland’s complaint","paragraphs":["para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181"]},{"title":"Count 11 alleged that Robert registered the trade name","paragraphs":["para_183"]},{"title":"7","paragraphs":["para_185"]},{"title":"Robert registered “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai.”","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"According to Roland, Guieb Group passed off the “Exhaust Systems","paragraphs":["para_188","para_189","para_190"]},{"title":"Count 12 alleged “Unfair and Deceptive/Unfair Competition”","paragraphs":["para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197"]},{"title":"Before the jury trial, the brothers both filed motions for","paragraphs":["para_199"]},{"title":"Circuit Court of the First Circuit Judge John M. Tonaki granted","paragraphs":["para_201"]},{"title":"Regarding Roland’s count 12 claim, the circuit court","paragraphs":["para_203","para_204"]},{"title":"(Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai) sold the same product. See","paragraphs":["para_206"]},{"title":"Roland requested punitive damages for several counts:","paragraphs":["para_208","para_209"]},{"title":"8","paragraphs":["para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214"]},{"title":"As for Roland’s kinship fiduciary duty claim (count 4), the","paragraphs":["para_216","para_217"]},{"title":"On December 30, 2019, the jury returned a verdict in favor","paragraphs":["para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225","para_226"]},{"title":"A. Roland’s Count 12 Claims Should Have Gone to the Jury","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"The circuit court erred by granting Robert’s MPSJ on count","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"12. Roland offered sufficient evidence to overcome summary","paragraphs":["para_230"]},{"title":"Count 12 alleged unfair and deceptive trade practices and","paragraphs":["para_232","para_233"]},{"title":"Act). Robert characterized count 12 as duplicative of other","paragraphs":["para_235"]},{"title":"9","paragraphs":["para_237"]},{"title":"He filed a MPSJ, arguing that Roland’s trade name infringement","paragraphs":["para_239"]},{"title":"Hawaii,” Robert said, is a generic trade name that merely","paragraphs":["para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245"]},{"title":"Robert explained that courts use a “likelihood of","paragraphs":["para_247","para_248","para_249","para_250","para_251"]},{"title":"Roland countered. There was strong evidence of “confusion”","paragraphs":["para_253"]},{"title":"Roland maintained that both trade names - “Exhaust Systems","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Hawaii” and “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi Kai” – were used for","paragraphs":["para_256","para_257"]},{"title":"Roland also said Robert’s expert undermined his claim that using","paragraphs":["para_259","para_260","para_261"]},{"title":"10","paragraphs":["para_263","para_264"]},{"title":"Reviewing the website, it could appear that Exhaust Systems","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Hawaii and Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai are one entity as","paragraphs":["para_267","para_268","para_269"]},{"title":"The court granted Robert’s MPSJ and dismissed count 12. It","paragraphs":["para_271","para_272","para_273"]},{"title":"The ICA reversed. It reasoned that Robert’s own expert","paragraphs":["para_275","para_276","para_277"]},{"title":"Guieb Inc.’s website did not distinguish between the two","paragraphs":["para_279","para_280","para_281"]},{"title":"We agree with the ICA’s result, but mention a standing","paragraphs":["para_283","para_284","para_285","para_286","para_287"]},{"title":"11","paragraphs":["para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294"]},{"title":"Because Roland was not a consumer, the AG, or director of","paragraphs":["para_296","para_297"]},{"title":"But though HRS § 480-2(d) barred Roland’s UDAP claim, he","paragraphs":["para_299"]},{"title":"That subsection allows “[a]ny person [to] bring an action based","paragraphs":["para_301","para_302"]},{"title":"HRS §§ 480-1 (2008) and 480-2(e). Davis v. Four Seasons Hotel","paragraphs":["para_304"]},{"title":"The conduct that supports Roland’s UDAP claim may also","paragraphs":["para_306"]},{"title":"Serv. Ass’n, Inc., 113 Hawaiʻi 77, 111, 148 P.3d 1179, 1213","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(2006) (“[P]laintiffs may rely upon HMSA’s alleged unfair or","paragraphs":["para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313"]},{"title":"12","paragraphs":["para_315"]},{"title":"Id. Thus, Roland may use the same conduct to prove both his","paragraphs":["para_317"]},{"title":"Roland’s HRS § 481A-3 claim may also have merit. The same","paragraphs":["para_319"]},{"title":"Hawaii Medical Ass’n, 113 Hawaiʻi at 111, 148 P.3d at 1213","paragraphs":["para_321"]},{"title":"1348 (D. Haw. 1996) (cleaned up) (“[T]he same allegations could","paragraphs":["para_323","para_324"]},{"title":"Practices,” reads in part:","paragraphs":["para_326","para_327","para_328"]},{"title":"(1) Passes off goods or services as those of another;","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(2) Causes likelihood of confusion or of","paragraphs":["para_331","para_332"]},{"title":"(3) Causes likelihood of confusion or of","paragraphs":["para_334","para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338"]},{"title":"Robert used the trade name “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi Kai,”","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Roland believed there was strong evidence of “confusion.”","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Roland pointed to the near identical trade names, and Robert’s","paragraphs":["para_342"]},{"title":"13","paragraphs":["para_344"]},{"title":"Like the ICA, we believe Roland presented sufficient","paragraphs":["para_346","para_347","para_348"]},{"title":"B. The Circuit Court Erred in Dismissing Roland’s Punitive","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Damages Demand","paragraphs":["para_351"]},{"title":"Tort law is predominantly common law. The common law’s","paragraphs":["para_353","para_354"]},{"title":"As the common law rambles on, this court often turns to the","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"American Law Institute’s (ALI) restatements to track","paragraphs":["para_357","para_358"]},{"title":"Now decades since our leading punitive damages case, the","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"ALI has urged adjustments to the remedy that deters and punishes","paragraphs":["para_361","para_362","para_363"]},{"title":"Like before, we rely on the ALI’s insight to refresh Hawaiʻi","paragraphs":["para_365"]},{"title":"(1) establish recoverable tort liability, and (2) establish by","paragraphs":["para_367","para_368"]},{"title":"14","paragraphs":["para_370","para_371","para_372"]},{"title":"Restatement (Third) of Torts § 39 (Am. L. Inst., Tentative Draft","paragraphs":["para_374"]},{"title":"Here, the circuit court erred by granting Robert’s JMOL on","paragraphs":["para_376","para_377"]},{"title":"1. The Punitive Damages Standard","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Hawaiʻi’s go-to punitive damages case, Masaki, reaffirmed","paragraphs":["para_380"]},{"title":"Corp., 71 Haw. 1, 16-17, 780 P.2d 566, 575 (1989). “The","paragraphs":["para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386","para_387","para_388"]},{"title":"But Masaki broke from precedent. It adjusted the standard","paragraphs":["para_390","para_391"]},{"title":"Masaki covered many punitive damages law concepts. It","paragraphs":["para_393","para_394"]},{"title":"15","paragraphs":["para_396","para_397"]},{"title":"Id. at 7, 780 P.2d at 571 (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts","paragraphs":["para_399","para_400"]},{"title":"This court held that punitive damages may be awarded for strict","paragraphs":["para_402"]},{"title":"Second Restatement recommended that punitive damages be awarded","paragraphs":["para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411","para_412","para_413","para_414"]},{"title":"Masaki departed from the Second Restatement’s focus on a","paragraphs":["para_416","para_417"]},{"title":"780 P.2d at 572-23. In some cases, the court held, there was no","paragraphs":["para_419","para_420"]},{"title":"16","paragraphs":["para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425","para_426","para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434"]},{"title":"P.2d at 572 (citing Bright, 20 Haw. at 511). “In rejecting the","paragraphs":["para_436","para_437"]},{"title":"Wisconsin Supreme Court case proved persuasive:","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"This court has rested its analysis of punitive damages not","paragraphs":["para_440","para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444","para_445","para_446","para_447","para_448"]},{"title":"1980)). Masaki reasoned that “[s]o long as the plaintiff","paragraphs":["para_450"]},{"title":"17","paragraphs":["para_452","para_453","para_454","para_455"]},{"title":"Thus, Hawaiʻi’s punitive damages standard allows juries to","paragraphs":["para_457"]},{"title":"2. A New Punitive Damages Standard","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"This court values the ALI’s wisdom, but we do not","paragraphs":["para_460"]},{"title":"Here, we believe the Third Restatement sensibly evolves","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Hawaiʻi’s punitive damages law. We adopt our new standard from","paragraphs":["para_463"]},{"title":"(a) A plaintiff who establishes a defendant’s liability in","paragraphs":["para_465"]},{"title":"(1) who further establishes that the defendant is","paragraphs":["para_467","para_468","para_469"]},{"title":"63) or through replevin, ejectment, quiet title, or a","paragraphs":["para_471"]},{"title":"(2) who further establishes by clear-and-convincing","paragraphs":["para_473","para_474","para_475","para_476","para_477","para_478"]},{"title":"We also adopt the ALI’s contemporary definitions of","paragraphs":["para_480","para_481","para_482"]},{"title":"18","paragraphs":["para_484","para_485"]},{"title":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e (quoting Restatement","paragraphs":["para_487"]},{"title":"The Third Restatement also defines recklessly:","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"A person acts recklessly in engaging in conduct if:","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(a) the person knows of the risk of harm created by the","paragraphs":["para_491","para_492","para_493","para_494","para_495","para_496"]},{"title":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e (quoting Restatement","paragraphs":["para_498"]},{"title":"The ALI’s Restatement (Third) of Torts: Remedies, approved","paragraphs":["para_500","para_501","para_502"]},{"title":"The ALI’s new punitive damages standard complements the","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Restatement (Third) of Torts: Physical & Emotional Harm. There","paragraphs":["para_505","para_506","para_507","para_508","para_509","para_510"]},{"title":"Second, the Restatement shed outdated mental state","paragraphs":["para_512"]},{"title":"19","paragraphs":["para_514"]},{"title":"Punitive damages are appropriate when “‘defendant intended to","paragraphs":["para_516","para_517","para_518","para_519","para_520","para_521"]},{"title":"These standards, the Restatement explained, are based on","paragraphs":["para_523"]},{"title":"Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm. Id. The","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Third Restatement “unblends” the Second Restatement’s","paragraphs":["para_526","para_527","para_528"]},{"title":"The Third Restatement also updates the Second Restatement’s","paragraphs":["para_530","para_531","para_532","para_533","para_534","para_535"]},{"title":"Terms conveying the idea of wrongdoing that is","paragraphs":["para_537","para_538","para_539"]},{"title":"Taken at face value, this term simply means negligence that","paragraphs":["para_541"]},{"title":"20","paragraphs":["para_543","para_544","para_545","para_546","para_547","para_548","para_549","para_550","para_551","para_552","para_553","para_554","para_555","para_556"]},{"title":"The Restatement’s recalibrated treatment of mental states","paragraphs":["para_558","para_559","para_560","para_561","para_562"]},{"title":"The Restatement (Third) of Torts § 39 moves away from","paragraphs":["para_564"]},{"title":"(“[A plaintiff must] establish[] by clear-and-convincing","paragraphs":["para_566","para_567","para_568","para_569","para_570","para_571","para_572","para_573"]},{"title":"21","paragraphs":["para_575"]},{"title":"What about long-standing punitive damages terms like","paragraphs":["para_577"]},{"title":"The Third Restatement reasons that those words retain","paragraphs":["para_579","para_580","para_581"]},{"title":"(Third) of Torts § 39, cmt. e. Yet because aggravated conduct","paragraphs":["para_583","para_584","para_585","para_586"]},{"title":"Restatement “preserves the ‘outrageousness’ language of the","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Restatement Second, Torts, as an alternative catch-all for","paragraphs":["para_589","para_590","para_591","para_592","para_593"]},{"title":"Id. “Outrageous” and “malicious” remain, the Restatement also","paragraphs":["para_595","para_596"]},{"title":"The ALI’s preservation of “malicious” and “outrageous” also","paragraphs":["para_598","para_599"]},{"title":"22","paragraphs":["para_601","para_602","para_603","para_604"]},{"title":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e. These principles","paragraphs":["para_606"]},{"title":"512; Masaki, 71 Haw. at 10-11, 780 P.2d at 572-73. Hawaiʻi","paragraphs":["para_608","para_609"]},{"title":"Masaki, 71 Haw. at 10-11, 780 P.2d at 572-73. Thus, “malicious”","paragraphs":["para_611","para_612"]},{"title":"The Restatement (Third) of Torts acknowledges the social","paragraphs":["para_614","para_615"]},{"title":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e. The Third","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Restatement explains that the mental states set forth in","paragraphs":["para_618"]},{"title":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e. It tagged “or","paragraphs":["para_620","para_621","para_622","para_623","para_624","para_625"]},{"title":"23","paragraphs":["para_627"]},{"title":"Developments to the ALI’s punitive damages principles show","paragraphs":["para_629","para_630"]},{"title":"See David J. Gilmartin, Status and Trends in State Product","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Liability Law: Punitive Damages, 14 J. of Legis. 249, 250 (1987)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(“One primary objective of the deterrent function is to prevent","paragraphs":["para_634","para_635","para_636","para_637","para_638"]},{"title":"Catherine M. Sharkey, Punitive Damages Transformed into Societal","paragraphs":["para_640","para_641"]},{"title":"2021). Redressing social harms, a goal advanced by product","paragraphs":["para_643","para_644","para_645","para_646"]},{"title":"If the conduct is malicious or outrageous, then punitive damages","paragraphs":["para_648"]},{"title":"Masaki, 71 Haw. at 10-11, 780 P.2d at 572-73 (“So long as the","paragraphs":["para_650","para_651"]},{"title":"24","paragraphs":["para_653","para_654","para_655","para_656","para_657"]},{"title":"The Third Restatement’s approach also aids the advancement","paragraphs":["para_659","para_660","para_661"]},{"title":"13 U. Haw. L. Rev. 659, 673-74 (1991). “Hawaii’s verbose","paragraphs":["para_663","para_664","para_665","para_666","para_667"]},{"title":"(allowing punitive damages for “oppression, fraud, or malice,”","paragraphs":["para_669"]},{"title":"Punitive damages are civil, yet quasi-criminal in their","paragraphs":["para_671","para_672","para_673","para_674"]},{"title":"(“[P]unitive damages are a form of punishment and can stigmatize","paragraphs":["para_676"]},{"title":"25","paragraphs":["para_678"]},{"title":"Thus, we believe it’s useful to look back at the removal of","paragraphs":["para_680","para_681"]},{"title":"Terms like “malice” and “wanton” once were criminal law","paragraphs":["para_683","para_684","para_685","para_686","para_687"]},{"title":"Id. “In criminal law - where malice once enjoyed historical","paragraphs":["para_689","para_690","para_691","para_692"]},{"title":"Pre-statehood criminal law in Hawaiʻi used the term “malice”","paragraphs":["para_694"]},{"title":"Kingdom of Hawaiʻi ruled that absent “malice aforethought,” a","paragraphs":["para_696"]},{"title":"The King v. Sherman, 1 Haw. 88, 88 (Haw. Kingdom 1853). After","paragraphs":["para_698","para_699","para_700","para_701"]},{"title":"12 (Haw. Terr. 1926) (citing Revised Laws of Hawaiʻi § 4119","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"26","paragraphs":["para_704"]},{"title":"(1925)). “[M]alice is the element which distinguishes murder","paragraphs":["para_706"]},{"title":"(Haw. Terr. 1918). Then during early statehood, “malice","paragraphs":["para_708","para_709"]},{"title":"In 1972, the Hawaiʻi Penal Code detached “malice” and its","paragraphs":["para_711","para_712","para_713","para_714","para_715"]},{"title":"Turning to the civil justice system, malice has long guided","paragraphs":["para_717"]},{"title":"Ry. Co. v. Prentice, 147 U.S. 101, 107 (1893). Yet “malice” is","paragraphs":["para_719","para_720","para_721","para_722"]},{"title":"In Bright, the court adopted “malice” as a feature of","paragraphs":["para_724","para_725","para_726","para_727","para_728"]},{"title":"27","paragraphs":["para_730"]},{"title":"U.S. at 107). Bright then quoted another Supreme Court case to","paragraphs":["para_732","para_733","para_734","para_735"]},{"title":"(quoting Milwaukee & St. P.R. Co. v. Arms, 91 U.S. 489, 495","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1875)). Decades later, Masaki recited this standard word for","paragraphs":["para_738"]},{"title":"The plaintiff must prove by clear and convincing","paragraphs":["para_740","para_741","para_742","para_743","para_744","para_745"]},{"title":"71 Haw. at 16-17, 780 P.2d at 575 (citing Bright, 20 Haw. at","paragraphs":["para_747"]},{"title":"Since the late 1800s, our caselaw has stuck to “wantonly,”","paragraphs":["para_749","para_750","para_751","para_752"]},{"title":"Kaeleku Sugar Co., Ltd., 29 Haw. 524, 532 (Haw. Terr. 1926)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(“This court has further held that vindictive damages are","paragraphs":["para_755","para_756","para_757"]},{"title":"28","paragraphs":["para_759"]},{"title":"Co., 52 Haw. 235, 239, 473 P.2d 563, 566 (1970) (“In this","paragraphs":["para_761","para_762","para_763","para_764"]},{"title":"Then, those terms made more sense. But today, where the","paragraphs":["para_766","para_767","para_768","para_769","para_770","para_771","para_772","para_773"]},{"title":"Haw. at 11, 780 P.2d at 572. We believe that clearer","paragraphs":["para_775","para_776"]},{"title":"Our civil jury instructions reflect the unwieldy present","paragraphs":["para_778","para_779"]},{"title":"Wordy definitions populate the law that our courts command","paragraphs":["para_781","para_782","para_783"]},{"title":"29","paragraphs":["para_785","para_786","para_787","para_788","para_789","para_790","para_791","para_792","para_793","para_794"]},{"title":"This court has long-respected the ALI’s analysis of common","paragraphs":["para_796","para_797","para_798"]},{"title":"This court has many times relied on the Restatement","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(Second) of Torts as persuasive authority. See, e.g., Hac","paragraphs":["para_801"]},{"title":"(2003) (adopting elements and approach of Restatement","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(Second) of Torts § 46 (1965) for tort of intentional","paragraphs":["para_804"]},{"title":"Gateway Hotel, Inc., 69 Haw. 376, 386, 742 P.2d 377, 384","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1987) (relying on Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314(A)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1965) to establish the duty of innkeeper to guest “to take","paragraphs":["para_808","para_809"]},{"title":"Haw. 131, 137–38, 612 P.2d 533, 539 (1980) (citing","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Restatement (Second) of Torts § 285 (1965) to hold that","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Hawaiʻi’s “liquor control statute does impose a duty upon a","paragraphs":["para_813","para_814"]},{"title":"75, 470 P.2d 240, 243 (1970) (adopting Restatement (Second)","paragraphs":["para_816"]},{"title":"Chun v. Park, 51 Haw. 462, 468, 462 P.2d 905, 909 (1969)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(adopting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 (Tentative","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Draft No. 12, 1966) as “a fair and just restatement of the","paragraphs":["para_820","para_821"]},{"title":"30","paragraphs":["para_823"]},{"title":"To propel Hawaiʻi’s punitive damages standard to","paragraphs":["para_825"]},{"title":"The ALI’s latest revision offers a clearer mental standard","paragraphs":["para_827","para_828","para_829","para_830","para_831","para_832"]},{"title":"Still, as mentioned, we do not completely discard long-","paragraphs":["para_834","para_835","para_836","para_837","para_838","para_839","para_840","para_841"]},{"title":"This “catch all” is important because Hawaiʻi law allows","paragraphs":["para_843"]},{"title":"5, 780 P.2d at 569-70. Thus, we believe that negligent torts","paragraphs":["para_845","para_846","para_847"]},{"title":"31","paragraphs":["para_849"]},{"title":"Last, we address the need for a plaintiff to establish","paragraphs":["para_851","para_852","para_853"]},{"title":"Because this court has previously held that plaintiffs may","paragraphs":["para_855","para_856"]},{"title":"Associated Hotels, Ltd., 40 Haw. 492, 500 (Haw. Terr. 1954) (“In","paragraphs":["para_858","para_859","para_860","para_861","para_862","para_863","para_864","para_865"]},{"title":"(emphasis added) (citing D. Dobbs, Handbook on the Law of","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Remedies, § 3.9, at 204 (1973); Restatement (Second) of Torts","paragraphs":["para_868","para_869","para_870"]},{"title":"We hold that a plaintiff must (1) establish recoverable","paragraphs":["para_872","para_873"]},{"title":"32","paragraphs":["para_875","para_876","para_877","para_878"]},{"title":"3. The Punitive Damages Evidentiary Standard","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"We now turn to the plaintiff’s burden of proof to get the","paragraphs":["para_881"]},{"title":"In a jury trial, a judge first determines as a matter of","paragraphs":["para_883","para_884","para_885","para_886","para_887","para_888","para_889"]},{"title":"Here, the circuit court granted Robert’s JMOL dismissing","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Roland’s punitive damages issue. Hawaiʻi Rules of Civil","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Procedure (HRCP) Rule 50, Judgment as a Matter of Law guides the","paragraphs":["para_893"]},{"title":"If during a trial by jury a party has been fully heard on","paragraphs":["para_895","para_896","para_897","para_898","para_899","para_900","para_901"]},{"title":"(Emphasis added.)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"33","paragraphs":["para_904","para_905","para_906","para_907","para_908","para_909","para_910"]},{"title":"A circuit court does not determine whether a jury could","paragraphs":["para_912"]},{"title":"Pleho, LLC v. Lacy, 144 Hawaiʻi 224, 239-40, 439 P.3d 176, 191-92","paragraphs":["para_914"]},{"title":"Rather, the court simply determines if there is any legally","paragraphs":["para_916"]},{"title":"The jury then evaluates the quality of that evidence and whether","paragraphs":["para_918","para_919"]},{"title":"4. The circuit court erred in granting Robert’s JMOL on","paragraphs":["para_921","para_922"]},{"title":"We agree with the ICA that punitive damages should’ve gone","paragraphs":["para_924"]},{"title":"After the evidence closed, Robert moved for JMOL as to","paragraphs":["para_926","para_927"]},{"title":"34","paragraphs":["para_929","para_930"]},{"title":"Ray v. Kapiolani Med. Specialists, 125 Hawaiʻi 253, 261, 259 P.3d","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"569, 577 (2011). A court must deny a JMOL regarding punitive","paragraphs":["para_933"]},{"title":"HRCP Rule 50(a)(1); Miyamoto, 104 Hawaiʻi at 7, 84 P.3d at 515","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(JMOL is only appropriate if there is no evidence to support a","paragraphs":["para_936","para_937","para_938","para_939"]},{"title":"Under Masaki, the circuit court erred by granting Robert’s","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"JMOL. There was sufficient evidence to instruct a jury on","paragraphs":["para_942"]},{"title":"Roland presented evidence that a jury could find that Robert","paragraphs":["para_944","para_945","para_946"]},{"title":"Roland identified five evidentiary areas that may merit a","paragraphs":["para_948"]},{"title":"Robert “stole” the King Street shop from Guieb Inc., decreasing","paragraphs":["para_950","para_951"]},{"title":"Robert misappropriated the Guieb Inc. trade name “Exhaust","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Systems Hawaii” because Robert’s own company, Guieb Group, used","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"35","paragraphs":["para_955","para_956","para_957"]},{"title":"Third, Roland showed that Robert hired away “valued","paragraphs":["para_959","para_960","para_961"]},{"title":"Robert “drastically” reduced his salary. Last, Roland presented","paragraphs":["para_963"]},{"title":"Groups’s advertising costs so that Guieb Inc. paid more than its","paragraphs":["para_965"]},{"title":"Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to non-","paragraphs":["para_967","para_968","para_969","para_970","para_971","para_972","para_973"]},{"title":"We hold that there was sufficient evidence to instruct the","paragraphs":["para_975","para_976"]},{"title":"C. The ICA Wrongly Held that a Kinship Fiduciary Duty Exists","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Hawaiʻi does not recognize a fiduciary duty based solely on","paragraphs":["para_979"]},{"title":"36","paragraphs":["para_981"]},{"title":"The closest Hawaiʻi has to a kinship fiduciary duty is a","paragraphs":["para_983","para_984"]},{"title":"Wong, 57 Haw. 137, 139, 552 P.2d 635, 637 (1976). That","paragraphs":["para_986","para_987","para_988"]},{"title":"Kam Oi Lee recognized that a confidential relationship may","paragraphs":["para_990","para_991"]},{"title":"Id. They held interest in the same property as tenants in","paragraphs":["para_993","para_994","para_995","para_996","para_997","para_998","para_999","para_1000","para_1001","para_1002","para_1003","para_1004"]},{"title":"637. To apply an “‘abuse of confidence’ constructive trust,” a","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"37","paragraphs":["para_1007","para_1008","para_1009","para_1010","para_1011","para_1012","para_1013","para_1014","para_1015","para_1016","para_1017","para_1018","para_1019","para_1020","para_1021","para_1022","para_1023","para_1024"]},{"title":"639. Failure to sell the property and transfer the proceeds to","paragraphs":["para_1026","para_1027"]},{"title":"The constructive trust in Kam Oi Lee that created a","paragraphs":["para_1029"]},{"title":"Guieb brothers’ business partnership. The Guiebs were just two","paragraphs":["para_1031"]},{"title":"38","paragraphs":["para_1033","para_1034"]},{"title":"Robert leased space to perform automotive work, specifically","paragraphs":["para_1036"]},{"title":"As Robert’s business flourished, he asked Roland if he wanted to","paragraphs":["para_1038"]},{"title":"Our holding does not rule out unique situations that may","paragraphs":["para_1040","para_1041","para_1042","para_1043","para_1044"]},{"title":"Tech. Ltd. P’ship v. Automationdirect.com, 471 F.3d 745, 749","paragraphs":["para_1046"]},{"title":"47 Haw. at 140, 552 P.2d at 638 (“health, age, education and","paragraphs":["para_1048","para_1049"]},{"title":"Even if we considered those features, Roland and Robert’s","paragraphs":["para_1051","para_1052","para_1053"]},{"title":"We decline to impose special fiduciary duties on siblings","paragraphs":["para_1055","para_1056","para_1057"]},{"title":"39","paragraphs":["para_1059","para_1060"]},{"title":"We affirm in part the ICA’s September 6, 2024 Judgment on","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Appeal and remand count 12 to the circuit court for further","paragraphs":["para_1063","para_1064","para_1065"]},{"title":"John D. Ferry III /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald","paragraphs":["para_1067"]},{"title":"Carroll on the briefs) /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna","paragraphs":["para_1069","para_1070"]},{"title":"Fred Paul Benco","paragraphs":["para_1072","para_1073"]},{"title":"40","paragraphs":[]}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"Electronically Filed","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"Supreme Court","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"SCWC-20-0000727","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"01-JUL-2025","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"09:12 AM","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"Dkt. 19 OP","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"---o0o---","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"ROLAND S. GUIEB, individually and derivatively on behalf of","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"GUIEB INCORPORATED, Respondent/Plaintiff/Counterclaim","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee,","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"vs.","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"ROBERT S. GUIEB,","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"and","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"GUIEB INCORPORATED,","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"Petitioner/Defendant/Counterclaimant-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"and","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"PACIFIC WELDING AND MANUFACTURING, LLC;","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"GUIEB GROUP LLC; RSG ENTERPRISES, LLC,","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"Petitioners/Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants.","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"SCWC-20-0000727","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"(CAAP-20-0000727; CASE NO. 1CC171001045)","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"JULY 1, 2025","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"RECKTENWALD, C.J., McKENNA, EDDINS, AND GINOZA, JJ.,","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"WITH CIRCUIT JUDGE VIOLA IN PLACE OF DEVENS, J., RECUSED","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"OPINION OF THE COURT BY EDDINS, J.","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"Two brothers ran an automotive business together. Robert","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"invited his older brother Roland to join his business. They","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"formed Guieb Inc. and opened several muffler repair shops","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"together before their relationship soured.","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"Roland sued Robert after Robert made decisions Roland","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"disagreed with. Roland complained that Robert used their","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"company, Guieb Inc., for his sole benefit, and that Robert used","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"his personal companies to steal Guieb Inc.’s trade name and most","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"profitable shop.","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"Roland alleged unfair and deceptive trade practices (UDAP)","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"and unfair methods of competition (UMOC) under Hawaiʻi Revised","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"Statutes (HRS) § 480-2 (2008), and deceptive trade practices","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"under HRS § 481A-3 (2008) in count 12. He alleged that Robert","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"used the trade name “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi Kai” for his","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"personal LLC (Guieb Group LLC). This caused confusion with","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"their joint venture Guieb Inc.’s trade name, “Exhaust Systems","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"Hawaii.”","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"The circuit court granted Robert’s motion for partial","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"summary judgment (MPSJ) and dismissed count 12. It did not see","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"a “genuine issue of material fact as to any passing off goods or","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"services of those of another because the two entities . . . were","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"selling the exact same product and service.” See HRS § 481A-","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"3(a)(1).","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"Roland sought punitive damages for several claims,","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"including fraud, misrepresentation, nondisclosure, and breach of","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"fiduciary duty. Before the jury heard closing arguments, the","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"trial court granted Robert’s motion for judgment as a matter of","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"law (JMOL), denying Roland’s punitive damages request. Punitive","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"damages did not go to the jury. Later the court denied Roland’s","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"renewed JMOL on that issue.","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"Last, Roland claimed that Robert breached a fiduciary duty","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"of “kinship.” Robert filed an MPSJ arguing that brotherhood did","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"not establish a fiduciary duty. He argued that he had a","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"fiduciary duty to the corporation, and that duty arose solely","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"from his status as an officer and director of Guieb Inc. The","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"circuit court granted Robert’s motion. It ruled the caselaw was","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"“clear that kinship by itself is not sufficient to establish a","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"confidential relationship.”","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"Both brothers appealed. The ICA reversed the circuit court","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"on three issues.","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"First, the ICA held that Roland’s UDAP claim (count 12)","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"should have gone to the jury because Roland presented evidence","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"that Robert represented Guieb Inc. and Guieb Group as the same","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"entity.","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"Second, the ICA held that the jury should have considered","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"punitive damages. The ICA reasoned that because Robert took the","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"most profitable muffler shop for his own LLC without telling","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"3","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"Roland, and because the jury found in Roland’s favor on the","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"fraudulent non-disclosure, unjust enrichment, and trade name","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"infringement claims, the court should have instructed the jury","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"on Roland’s punitive damages claim.","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"Last, the ICA agreed with Roland - brotherhood created a","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"kinship fiduciary duty. Summary judgment was not appropriate,","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"the ICA said. A jury may have found that Roland, based on his","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"“confidential familial relationship” with Robert, relied on","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"Robert’s representations. They may have found that Robert only","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"acquired majority ownership of Guieb Inc. because he promised","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"Roland that the ownership imbalance would not affect the","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"business. And the jury may have found that Robert breached his","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"kinship fiduciary duty when he allegedly “eliminate[d] Roland’s","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"check-writing authority, reduce[d] his salary, and","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"misappropriate[d] [Guieb Inc.’s] King Street shop and other","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"assets.” Thus, the ICA held, Roland established a genuine issue","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"of material fact regarding breach of fiduciary duty based on","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"kinship.","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"We agree with the ICA that the jury should have considered","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"Roland’s count 12 claims and punitive damages. But we disagree","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"that kinship creates a fiduciary duty.","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"The ICA correctly reversed the circuit court’s dismissal of","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"count 12. Though we rule that Roland lacked standing for his","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"UDAP claim and diverge from the ICA there, Roland presented","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"4","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"sufficient evidence to overcome summary judgment for his HRS","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"§ 480-2(e) UMOC and HRS § 481A-3 deceptive trade practices","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"claims. Therefore, count 12 should have gone to the jury","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"Next, we agree with the ICA that punitive damages should","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"also have gone to the jury. We conclude that Roland presented","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"sufficient evidence for the jury to decide whether Robert acted","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"with the state of mind to justify punitive damages. There was","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"evidence that may have supported a jury’s punitive damages","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"finding. A reasonable juror may have concluded (1) that","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"“stealing” the King Street shop for Robert’s personal company","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"(Guieb Group), (2) taking employees from Guieb Inc. to benefit","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"Guieb Group, (3) reducing Roland’s salary, and (4) making Guieb","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"Inc. pay most advertising costs (to the benefit of Guieb Group)","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"showed Robert’s intent to harm Roland, or that Robert acted with","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"reckless disregard for the risk of harm to Roland.","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"Thus, we affirm the ICA’s conclusion that the circuit court","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"erred in granting Robert’s JMOL on the punitive damages issue.","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"Last, we disagree with the ICA that Robert had a fiduciary","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"duty to Roland based on their brotherly relationship. A","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"“kinship” duty does not exist in Hawaiʻi law. And we decline to","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"adopt it now. We affirm the circuit court’s MPSJ on this issue.","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"I.","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"In the 1980s, Robert Guieb asked his older brother, Roland","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"Guieb, to work with him. They registered Guieb Inc. in 1991 and","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"5","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"did business as “Exhaust Systems Hawaii.” The corporation","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"specializes in welding repair, and procuring, installing,","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"replacing, and repairing automobile exhaust systems and related","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"components. Robert is the majority owner at 55% while Roland","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"owns 45%. They are Guieb Inc.’s only directors, officers, and","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"owners. Roland is the corporation’s treasurer.","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"Guieb Inc. opened its first shop in Waipahu in 1985. That","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"property is owned by RSG Enterprises LLC, an LLC that Robert and","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"Roland both own. The second shop opened on King Street in 1989,","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"and a third location opened in Kailua two years later.","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"The brothers’ relationship began to fracture in 2011. In","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"2014, Robert established his own entity, Guieb Group LLC (Guieb","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"Group), to sell and service mufflers. Guieb Group used the","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"trade name “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai.” Roland accused","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"Robert of stealing Guieb Inc.’s trade name and intentionally","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"confusing its customers. Robert claimed Roland agreed that","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"Guieb Group could use the trade name.","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"In 2016, Robert canceled Guieb Inc.’s monthly lease at the","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"King Street Shop. Guieb Group, which Robert wholly owned, took","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"over the shop. Robert said the decision was intended to lower","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"Guieb Inc.’s expenses. Roland accused Robert of “stealing” the","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"most profitable shop.","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"Roland alleged that Robert implemented arbitrary policy","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"changes that benefitted Robert at Roland’s expense, such as","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"6","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"relocating personnel from one location or job function to","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"another to benefit Robert’s own companies, and decreasing","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"Roland’s salary. Robert also claimed Roland misappropriated","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"Guieb Inc.’s funds for his personal use. As a result, Robert","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"restricted Roland’s access to and control over Guieb Inc.’s","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"finances. Both brothers maintain that the other ignored their","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"meeting requests.","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"In June 2018, Roland, individually and derivatively on","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"behalf of Guieb Inc., filed a first amended complaint. Roland","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"named Robert, Guieb Inc., Pacific Welding and Manufacturing, LLC","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"(Robert’s wholly owned company), Guieb Group, and RSG","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"Enterprises as defendants. Relevant to this appeal, Roland","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"alleged breach of kinship fiduciary duty, unfair and deceptive","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"trade practices and unfair methods of competition. Roland also","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"requested punitive damages.","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"Count 4 of Roland’s amended complaint alleged “Breaches of","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"Fiduciary Duties Arising Out of Kinship.” Roland’s complaint","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"said that he “co-founded” Guieb Inc. “based upon his kinship","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"with Robert, and his trust and confidence in Robert based upon","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"his lifetime of brotherhood. . . . Robert has breached","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"fiduciary duties to Roland arising out of the close kinship","paragraph_id":"para_180"},{"text":"which were the basis of and motivation for” Guieb Inc.","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"Count 11 alleged that Robert registered the trade name","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"“Exhaust Systems Hawaii” for Guieb Inc. Twenty years later,","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"7","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"Robert registered “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai.”","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"According to Roland, Guieb Group passed off the “Exhaust Systems","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"Hawaii Kalihi-Kai” trade name as being identical to Guieb Inc.","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"This “misappropriation” of Guieb Inc.’s trade name, he claimed,","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"confused Guieb Inc.’s customers.","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"Count 12 alleged “Unfair and Deceptive/Unfair Competition”","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"under HRS §§ 480-2 and 481A-3. Roland contended Robert injured","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"him and Guieb Inc. by employing unfair and deceptive trade","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"practices and unfair methods of competition, including (1)","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"passing off goods or services as those of Guieb Inc.; (2)","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"misrepresenting or causing confusion about the goods or","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"services; and (3) disparaging Guieb Inc.’s business.","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"Before the jury trial, the brothers both filed motions for","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"partial summary judgment. Relevant to the appeal issues,","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"Circuit Court of the First Circuit Judge John M. Tonaki granted","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"Robert’s motion for partial summary judgment on counts 4 and 12.","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"Regarding Roland’s count 12 claim, the circuit court","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"reasoned that no genuine issue of material fact remained because","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"both Guieb Inc. (Exhaust Systems Hawaii) and Guieb Group","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"(Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai) sold the same product. See","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"HRS § 481A-3(a)(1).","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"Roland requested punitive damages for several counts:","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, misrepresentation and","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"nondisclosure, oppressive conduct intended to squeeze him out,","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"8","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"and wanton usurpation of corporate opportunity. The court","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"granted Robert’s judgment as a matter of law motion as to","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"Roland’s punitive damages requests.","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"As for Roland’s kinship fiduciary duty claim (count 4), the","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"circuit court ruled that brotherhood did not establish a","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"fiduciary relationship.","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"On December 30, 2019, the jury returned a verdict in favor","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"of Roland on his fraudulent non-disclosure, unjust enrichment,","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"and trade name infringement claims. For fraudulent non-","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"disclosure, the jury awarded Roland $42,000 against Robert, and","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"$28,000 against Guieb Group. For unjust enrichment, the jury","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"awarded Guieb Inc. $42,000 against Guieb Group. Last, for trade","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"name infringement, the jury awarded Guieb Inc. $10,000 against","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"Robert and $20,000 against Guieb Group.","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"II.","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"A. Roland’s Count 12 Claims Should Have Gone to the Jury","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"The circuit court erred by granting Robert’s MPSJ on count","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"12. Roland offered sufficient evidence to overcome summary","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"judgment on that count.","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"Count 12 alleged unfair and deceptive trade practices and","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"unfair methods of competition under HRS § 480-2, and deceptive","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"trade practices under HRS § 481A-3 (Uniform Trade Practices","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"Act). Robert characterized count 12 as duplicative of other","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"counts, and a “novel combination” of HRS chapters 480 and 481A.","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"9","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"He filed a MPSJ, arguing that Roland’s trade name infringement","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"and unfair competition claims were baseless. “Exhaust Systems","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"Hawaii,” Robert said, is a generic trade name that merely","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"describes the nature of Guieb Inc.’s business, and “merits no","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"legal protection.” Robert also argued that Roland leveled anti-","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"trust accusations, yet had no proof that Guieb Group’s use of","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"“Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai” harmed or reduced","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"competition.","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"Robert explained that courts use a “likelihood of","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"confusion” standard when analyzing trade name infringement and","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"unfair competition claims. Under that standard, a generic trade","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"name has no legal protection. Because “Exhaust Systems Hawaii”","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"merely described the nature of Guieb Inc.’s business, Robert","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"argued, it was generic.","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"Roland countered. There was strong evidence of “confusion”","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"due to Robert’s use of “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi Kai.”","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"Roland maintained that both trade names - “Exhaust Systems","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"Hawaii” and “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi Kai” – were used for","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"different businesses that both sold, installed, and repaired","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"“similar, if not identical, muffler systems.” (Emphases added.)","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"Roland also said Robert’s expert undermined his claim that using","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"“Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi Kai” did not affect Guieb Inc.’s","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"business. Robert’s expert reported that the Guieb Inc. website","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"did not distinguish between the two companies: “[Guieb Inc.’s]","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"10","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"website address is https://www.exhaustsystemsHawaii.net/.","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"Reviewing the website, it could appear that Exhaust Systems","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"Hawaii and Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai are one entity as","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"all the shops are listed. There is nothing on the website to","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"delineate the two different ownership groups.” (Emphasis","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"added.)","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"The court granted Robert’s MPSJ and dismissed count 12. It","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"did not see a “genuine issue of material fact as to any passing","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"off goods or services of those of another because the two","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"entities . . . were selling the exact same product and service.”","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"The ICA reversed. It reasoned that Robert’s own expert","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"stated that Guieb Group, trade name “Exhaust Systems Hawaii,”","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"could be viewed as a competitor to Guieb Inc., trade name","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"“Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi-Kai.” The expert also said that","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"Guieb Inc.’s website did not distinguish between the two","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"ownership groups. Thus, the ICA concluded that the jury should","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"have considered Roland’s HRS § 480-2 and HRS § 481A-3 UDAP","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"claims.","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"We agree with the ICA’s result, but mention a standing","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"issue the ICA missed. Roland’s UDAP claim is barred because he","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"lacks standing as a non-consumer under § 480-2(d).","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"“Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"unlawful.” HRS § 480-2(a). But subsection (d) limits who can","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"11","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"bring a claim under the chapter: “No person other than a","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"consumer, the attorney general or the director of the office of","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"consumer protection may bring an action based upon unfair or","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"deceptive acts or practices declared unlawful by this section.”","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"HRS § 480-2(d) (emphasis added).","paragraph_id":"para_294"},{"text":"Because Roland was not a consumer, the AG, or director of","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"the office of consumer protection, he had no standing to bring a","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"UDAP claim. HRS § 480-2(d).","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"But though HRS § 480-2(d) barred Roland’s UDAP claim, he","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"still had standing to bring a UMOC claim under HRS § 480-2(e).","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"That subsection allows “[a]ny person [to] bring an action based","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"on unfair methods of competition declared unlawful by this","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"section.” HRS § 480-2(e). Roland qualifies as “any person” per","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"HRS §§ 480-1 (2008) and 480-2(e). Davis v. Four Seasons Hotel","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"Ltd., 122 Hawaiʻi 423, 429, 228 P.3d 303, 309 (2010).","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"The conduct that supports Roland’s UDAP claim may also","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"support his UMOC claim. Hawaii Medical Ass’n v. Hawaii Medical","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"Serv. Ass’n, Inc., 113 Hawaiʻi 77, 111, 148 P.3d 1179, 1213","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"(2006) (“[P]laintiffs may rely upon HMSA’s alleged unfair or","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"deceptive acts or practices to support their claims of unfair","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"methods of competition.”). The UDAP and deceptive trade","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"practice claims are alike. Id. “[P]laintiffs may bring claims","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"of unfair methods of competition based on conduct that would","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"also support claims of unfair or deceptive acts or practices.”","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"12","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"Id. Thus, Roland may use the same conduct to prove both his","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"UDAP and UMOC claims. See id.","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"Roland’s HRS § 481A-3 claim may also have merit. The same","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"UMOC conduct may support the deceptive trade practices claim.","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"Hawaii Medical Ass’n, 113 Hawaiʻi at 111, 148 P.3d at 1213","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"(quoting Star Markets, Ltd. v. Texaco, Inc., 945 F. Supp. 1344,","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"1348 (D. Haw. 1996) (cleaned up) (“[T]he same allegations could","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"support claims of both §§ 481A and 480–2 unfair methods of","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"competition.”). HRS § 481A-3, titled “Deceptive Trade","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"Practices,” reads in part:","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"(a) A person engages in a deceptive trade practice when,","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"in the course of the person’s business, vocation, or","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"occupation, the person:","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"(1) Passes off goods or services as those of another;","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"(2) Causes likelihood of confusion or of","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship,","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"approval, or certification of good or services;","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"(3) Causes likelihood of confusion or of","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection, or","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"association with, or certification by, another;","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"HRS § 481A-3(a)(1)-(3) (emphasis added).","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"“Confusion” is one way to win a HRS chapter 481A deceptive","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"trade practices claim. See HRS § 481A-3(a)(2)-(3). Because","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"Robert used the trade name “Exhaust Systems Hawaii Kalihi Kai,”","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"Roland believed there was strong evidence of “confusion.”","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"Roland pointed to the near identical trade names, and Robert’s","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"expert’s testimony about the Guieb Inc. website.","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"13","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"Like the ICA, we believe Roland presented sufficient","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"evidence to overcome summary judgment on count 12’s HRS § 481A-3","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"unfair trade practices claim and HRS § 480-2(e) unfair methods","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"of competition claims. The circuit court erred.","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"B. The Circuit Court Erred in Dismissing Roland’s Punitive","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"Damages Demand","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"Next, punitive damages.","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"Tort law is predominantly common law. The common law’s","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"tradition evolves, and courts make decisions to reflect societal","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"values.","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"As the common law rambles on, this court often turns to the","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"American Law Institute’s (ALI) restatements to track","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"advancements in tort law. See Bynum v. Magno, 106 Hawaiʻi 81, 86","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"n.12, 101 P.3d 1149, 1154 n.12 (2004).","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"Now decades since our leading punitive damages case, the","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"ALI has urged adjustments to the remedy that deters and punishes","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"egregious tortious conduct. These changes streamline the mental","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"states that may yield punitive damages awards, and they clip","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"dated language.","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"Like before, we rely on the ALI’s insight to refresh Hawaiʻi","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"law. To recover punitive damages, we hold that a plaintiff must","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"(1) establish recoverable tort liability, and (2) establish by","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"clear and convincing evidence that the defendant intended to","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"harm the plaintiff or others, or recklessly disregarded a","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"14","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"substantial risk of harm to the plaintiff or others, or","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"otherwise acted in an outrageous or malicious manner.","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"Restatement (Third) of Torts § 39 (Am. L. Inst., Tentative Draft","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"No. 3, 2024).","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"Here, the circuit court erred by granting Robert’s JMOL on","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"punitive damages. Roland presented sufficient evidence to get","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"punitive damages before the jury.","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"1. The Punitive Damages Standard","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"Hawaiʻi’s go-to punitive damages case, Masaki, reaffirmed","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"this court’s Territory era standard. Masaki v. Gen. Motors","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"Corp., 71 Haw. 1, 16-17, 780 P.2d 566, 575 (1989). “The","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"plaintiff must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"defendant has acted wantonly or oppressively or with such malice","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"as implies a spirit of mischief or criminal indifference to","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"civil obligations, or where there has been some wilful","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"misconduct or that entire want of care which would raise the","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"presumption of a conscious indifference to consequences.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"(citing Bright v. Quinn, 20 Haw. 504, 512 (Haw. Terr. 1911)).","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"But Masaki broke from precedent. It adjusted the standard","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"of proof from “preponderance of the evidence” to “clear and","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"convincing.” 71 Haw. at 16-17, 780 P.2d at 575.","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"Masaki covered many punitive damages law concepts. It","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"channeled the Second Restatement’s approach to acts or omissions","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"that do not support that remedy. “[P]unitive damages are not","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"15","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"awarded for mere inadvertence, mistake, or errors of judgment.”","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"Id. at 7, 780 P.2d at 571 (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"§ 908, cmt. b).","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"In one big way, Masaki tacked from the Second Restatement.","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"This court held that punitive damages may be awarded for strict","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"products liability (a mental state-less tort). In contrast, the","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"Second Restatement recommended that punitive damages be awarded","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"only if the defendant’s conduct reflected an intent to harm or","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"reckless indifference. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 908,","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"cmt. b (1979). “Since the purpose of punitive damages is not","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"compensation of the plaintiff but punishment of the defendant","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"and deterrence, these damages can be awarded only for conduct","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"for which this remedy is appropriate — which is to say, conduct","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"involving some element of outrage similar to that usually found","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"in crime. The conduct must be outrageous, either because the","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"defendant’s acts are done with an evil motive or because they","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"are done with reckless indifference to the rights of others.”","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"Id.","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"Masaki departed from the Second Restatement’s focus on a","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"tortfeasor’s mental state. Instead, the wrongdoer’s aggravated","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"conduct justified punitive damages. See Masaki, 71 Haw. at 11,","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"780 P.2d at 572-23. In some cases, the court held, there was no","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"state of mind precondition. “We see no reason,” the court said,","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"“why punitive damages may not also be properly awarded in a","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"16","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"products liability action based on the underlying theory of","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"strict liability where the plaintiff proves the requisite","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"aggravating conduct on the part of the defendant.” Id. Removal","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"of the mental state inquiry “does not preclude consideration of","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"the defendant’s aggravating conduct for the purpose of assessing","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"punitive damages.” Id. This holding, the court reasoned, still","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"served the deterrent goal of punitive damages because","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"“‘something more’ than mere commission of a tort” is needed.","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"Id. at 12-13, 780 P.2d at 573.","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"In Hawaiʻi, negligence may support a punitive damages award.","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"“This court has long recognized that punitive damages are","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"recoverable in tort action based on negligence.” Id. at 10, 780","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"P.2d at 572 (citing Bright, 20 Haw. at 511). “In rejecting the","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"argument that [punitive] damages are incompatible with the","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"underlying theories of negligence and strict liability,” a","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"Wisconsin Supreme Court case proved persuasive:","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"This court has rested its analysis of punitive damages not","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"on the classification of the underlying tort justifying","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"compensatory damages but on the nature of the wrongdoer’s","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"conduct. . . .","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"Punitive damages rest on allegations which, if proved,","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"demonstrate a particular kind of conduct on the part of the","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"wrongdoer, which has variously been characterized in our","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"cases as malicious conduct or willful or wanton conduct in","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"reckless disregard of rights or interests.","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"Id. (quoting Wangen v. Ford Motor Co., 294 N.W.2d 437, 442 (Wis.","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"1980)). Masaki reasoned that “[s]o long as the plaintiff","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"established the requisite ‘outrageous’ conduct[] . . . there was","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"17","paragraph_id":"para_451"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"no reason to disallow an award of punitive damages in a","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"negligence or strict liability action.” Id. (citing Wangen,","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"294 N.W.2d at 443).","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"Thus, Hawaiʻi’s punitive damages standard allows juries to","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"award punitive damages for negligence or strict liability.","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"2. A New Punitive Damages Standard","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"This court values the ALI’s wisdom, but we do not","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"unblinkingly follow the Restatement’s principles.","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"Here, we believe the Third Restatement sensibly evolves","paragraph_id":"para_461"},{"text":"Hawaiʻi’s punitive damages law. We adopt our new standard from","paragraph_id":"para_462"},{"text":"the Restatement (Third) of Torts § 39 Punitive Damages:","paragraph_id":"para_463"},{"text":"(a) A plaintiff who establishes a defendant’s liability in","paragraph_id":"para_464"},{"text":"tort, and","paragraph_id":"para_465"},{"text":"(1) who further establishes that the defendant is","paragraph_id":"para_466"},{"text":"liable for compensatory or nominal damages (§§ 2-38), or","paragraph_id":"para_467"},{"text":"who establishes a right to recover money or other property","paragraph_id":"para_468"},{"text":"through an equitable or restitutionary remedy (§§ 42, 61-","paragraph_id":"para_469"},{"text":"63) or through replevin, ejectment, quiet title, or a","paragraph_id":"para_470"},{"text":"similar remedy (§§ 58-59), and","paragraph_id":"para_471"},{"text":"(2) who further establishes by clear-and-convincing","paragraph_id":"para_472"},{"text":"evidence that the defendant intended to harm the plaintiff","paragraph_id":"para_473"},{"text":"or others, recklessly disregarded a substantial risk of","paragraph_id":"para_474"},{"text":"harm to the plaintiff or others, or otherwise acted in an","paragraph_id":"para_475"},{"text":"outrageous or malicious manner may also recover punitive","paragraph_id":"para_476"},{"text":"damages in the discretion of the factfinder.","paragraph_id":"para_477"},{"text":"Restatement (Third) of Torts § 39.","paragraph_id":"para_478"},{"text":"We also adopt the ALI’s contemporary definitions of","paragraph_id":"para_479"},{"text":"intentionally and recklessly. “A person intends a harm or other","paragraph_id":"para_480"},{"text":"consequence if ‘(a) the person acts with the purpose of","paragraph_id":"para_481"},{"text":"producing that consequence; or (b) the person acts knowing that","paragraph_id":"para_482"},{"text":"18","paragraph_id":"para_483"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_484"},{"text":"the consequence is substantially certain to result.’”","paragraph_id":"para_485"},{"text":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e (quoting Restatement","paragraph_id":"para_486"},{"text":"(Third) of Torts: Phys. & Emot. Harm § 1 (2010)).","paragraph_id":"para_487"},{"text":"The Third Restatement also defines recklessly:","paragraph_id":"para_488"},{"text":"A person acts recklessly in engaging in conduct if:","paragraph_id":"para_489"},{"text":"(a) the person knows of the risk of harm created by the","paragraph_id":"para_490"},{"text":"conduct or knows facts that make the risk obvious to","paragraph_id":"para_491"},{"text":"another in the person’s situation, and (b) the precaution","paragraph_id":"para_492"},{"text":"that would eliminate or reduce the risk involves burdens","paragraph_id":"para_493"},{"text":"that are so slight relative to the magnitude of the risk as","paragraph_id":"para_494"},{"text":"to render the person’s failure to adopt the precaution a","paragraph_id":"para_495"},{"text":"demonstration of the person’s indifference to the risk.","paragraph_id":"para_496"},{"text":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e (quoting Restatement","paragraph_id":"para_497"},{"text":"(Third) of Torts: Phys. & Emot. Harm § 2)).","paragraph_id":"para_498"},{"text":"The ALI’s Restatement (Third) of Torts: Remedies, approved","paragraph_id":"para_499"},{"text":"in 2024, aligns with and enhances our present caselaw. It","paragraph_id":"para_500"},{"text":"offers a streamlined approach and refines the complicated","paragraph_id":"para_501"},{"text":"standard that presently guides our courts.","paragraph_id":"para_502"},{"text":"The ALI’s new punitive damages standard complements the","paragraph_id":"para_503"},{"text":"Restatement (Third) of Torts: Physical & Emotional Harm. There","paragraph_id":"para_504"},{"text":"the ALI updated its defintions for the mental states associated","paragraph_id":"para_505"},{"text":"with torts. “This Restatement states a similar but not","paragraph_id":"para_506"},{"text":"identical standard in language more consistent with the general","paragraph_id":"para_507"},{"text":"approach to mental states and tortious conduct in the","paragraph_id":"para_508"},{"text":"Restatement Third, Torts.” Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39,","paragraph_id":"para_509"},{"text":"cmt. e.","paragraph_id":"para_510"},{"text":"Second, the Restatement shed outdated mental state","paragraph_id":"para_511"},{"text":"concepts. It simplified the punitive damages inquiry. Id.","paragraph_id":"para_512"},{"text":"19","paragraph_id":"para_513"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_514"},{"text":"Punitive damages are appropriate when “‘defendant intended to","paragraph_id":"para_515"},{"text":"harm the plaintiff or others’ (a clearer mental standard than","paragraph_id":"para_516"},{"text":"‘evil motive’), or when defendant has ‘recklessly disregarded a","paragraph_id":"para_517"},{"text":"substantial risk of harm to the plaintiff or others’ (arguably a","paragraph_id":"para_518"},{"text":"clearer mental standard, and as explained below, a more","paragraph_id":"para_519"},{"text":"appropriate mental standard, than ‘reckless indifference to the","paragraph_id":"para_520"},{"text":"rights of others’).” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_521"},{"text":"These standards, the Restatement explained, are based on","paragraph_id":"para_522"},{"text":"mental state definitions revised by the Restatement (Third) of","paragraph_id":"para_523"},{"text":"Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm. Id. The","paragraph_id":"para_524"},{"text":"Third Restatement “unblends” the Second Restatement’s","paragraph_id":"para_525"},{"text":"previously-singular definition of “intent” into two forms of","paragraph_id":"para_526"},{"text":"intent: “purpose” and “knowledge.” Restatement (Third) of","paragraph_id":"para_527"},{"text":"Torts: Phys. & Emot. Harm § 1.","paragraph_id":"para_528"},{"text":"The Third Restatement also updates the Second Restatement’s","paragraph_id":"para_529"},{"text":"definition of “recklessness.” The shift reflects an","paragraph_id":"para_530"},{"text":"understanding that wrongdoing to support liability comes in many","paragraph_id":"para_531"},{"text":"forms and that courts and jurors may find it hard to parse","paragraph_id":"para_532"},{"text":"mental states when applying old-fashioned and overlapping terms","paragraph_id":"para_533"},{"text":"like “wanton” and “willful.” Restatement (Third) of Torts:","paragraph_id":"para_534"},{"text":"Phys. & Emot. Harm § 2.","paragraph_id":"para_535"},{"text":"Terms conveying the idea of wrongdoing that is","paragraph_id":"para_536"},{"text":"aggravated — even though falling short of the wrongdoing","paragraph_id":"para_537"},{"text":"involved in intentional torts — are common in the discourse","paragraph_id":"para_538"},{"text":"of torts. Sometimes, the term used is “gross negligence.”","paragraph_id":"para_539"},{"text":"Taken at face value, this term simply means negligence that","paragraph_id":"para_540"},{"text":"is especially bad. Given this literal interpretation,","paragraph_id":"para_541"},{"text":"20","paragraph_id":"para_542"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_543"},{"text":"gross negligence carries a meaning that is less than","paragraph_id":"para_544"},{"text":"recklessness. The term “willful or wanton misconduct” is","paragraph_id":"para_545"},{"text":"also frequently employed. “Willful misconduct” sometimes","paragraph_id":"para_546"},{"text":"refers to conduct involving an intent to cause harm; but","paragraph_id":"para_547"},{"text":"“wanton misconduct” is commonly understood to mean","paragraph_id":"para_548"},{"text":"recklessness. Frequently, courts refer to conduct that","paragraph_id":"para_549"},{"text":"displays a “reckless disregard for risk” or a “reckless","paragraph_id":"para_550"},{"text":"indifference to risk.” When a person’s conduct creates a","paragraph_id":"para_551"},{"text":"known risk that can be reduced by relatively modest","paragraph_id":"para_552"},{"text":"precautions, to state that the person displays a reckless","paragraph_id":"para_553"},{"text":"disregard for risk is equivalent to stating that the","paragraph_id":"para_554"},{"text":"person’s conduct is reckless.","paragraph_id":"para_555"},{"text":"Id. § 2, cmt. a.","paragraph_id":"para_556"},{"text":"The Restatement’s recalibrated treatment of mental states","paragraph_id":"para_557"},{"text":"highlights the wide range of “aggravated conduct” that may","paragraph_id":"para_558"},{"text":"establish a tort. And the Restatement better defines that scope","paragraph_id":"para_559"},{"text":"by pulling rusty terms like “willful,” “wanton” and “gross","paragraph_id":"para_560"},{"text":"misconduct.” See Restatement (Third) of Torts: Phys. & Emot.","paragraph_id":"para_561"},{"text":"Harm § 2.","paragraph_id":"para_562"},{"text":"The Restatement (Third) of Torts § 39 moves away from","paragraph_id":"para_563"},{"text":"similarly ill-fitting words. Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39","paragraph_id":"para_564"},{"text":"(“[A plaintiff must] establish[] by clear-and-convincing","paragraph_id":"para_565"},{"text":"evidence that the defendant intended to harm the plaintiff or","paragraph_id":"para_566"},{"text":"others, recklessly disregarded a substantial risk of harm to the","paragraph_id":"para_567"},{"text":"plaintiff or others, or otherwise acted in an outrageous or","paragraph_id":"para_568"},{"text":"malicious manner may also recover punitive damages in the","paragraph_id":"para_569"},{"text":"discretion of the factfinder.”). The punitive damages standard","paragraph_id":"para_570"},{"text":"for intent and recklessness now complements the intentional and","paragraph_id":"para_571"},{"text":"reckless state of mind standard from the Restatement (Third) of","paragraph_id":"para_572"},{"text":"Torts: Phys. & Emot. Harm §§ 1 & 2.","paragraph_id":"para_573"},{"text":"21","paragraph_id":"para_574"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_575"},{"text":"What about long-standing punitive damages terms like","paragraph_id":"para_576"},{"text":"“malicious” or “outrageous”?","paragraph_id":"para_577"},{"text":"The Third Restatement reasons that those words retain","paragraph_id":"para_578"},{"text":"marginal utility. The Restatement explains that most outrageous","paragraph_id":"para_579"},{"text":"or malicious conduct includes either the intent to harm or","paragraph_id":"para_580"},{"text":"reckless disregard of a substantial risk of harm. Restatement","paragraph_id":"para_581"},{"text":"(Third) of Torts § 39, cmt. e. Yet because aggravated conduct","paragraph_id":"para_582"},{"text":"to merit punitive damages may straddle situations where a mental","paragraph_id":"para_583"},{"text":"state did not clearly drive the conduct, or should not operate","paragraph_id":"para_584"},{"text":"to spare a wrongdoer from a punitives remedy, the Restatement","paragraph_id":"para_585"},{"text":"does not entirely sideline the seasoned terms. The Third","paragraph_id":"para_586"},{"text":"Restatement “preserves the ‘outrageousness’ language of the","paragraph_id":"para_587"},{"text":"Restatement Second, Torts, as an alternative catch-all for","paragraph_id":"para_588"},{"text":"situations in which a factfinder determines that defendant’s","paragraph_id":"para_589"},{"text":"conduct is so outrageous as to deserve punishment or deterrence","paragraph_id":"para_590"},{"text":"through punitive damages, even if plaintiff does not prove","paragraph_id":"para_591"},{"text":"defendant’s mental state, or if the factfinder views the effects","paragraph_id":"para_592"},{"text":"on plaintiff as seriously wrongful but not necessarily harmful.”","paragraph_id":"para_593"},{"text":"Id. “Outrageous” and “malicious” remain, the Restatement also","paragraph_id":"para_594"},{"text":"explains, because many older statutes and cases still rely on","paragraph_id":"para_595"},{"text":"this traditional language. Id.","paragraph_id":"para_596"},{"text":"The ALI’s preservation of “malicious” and “outrageous” also","paragraph_id":"para_597"},{"text":"reflects how punitive damages increasingly remedy social rather","paragraph_id":"para_598"},{"text":"than purely individual harms. Rather than focusing on intent or","paragraph_id":"para_599"},{"text":"22","paragraph_id":"para_600"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_601"},{"text":"recklessness that harms a person, the ALI suggests that punitive","paragraph_id":"para_602"},{"text":"damages also aim to deter conduct that risks injuring non-party","paragraph_id":"para_603"},{"text":"bystanders or larger societal groups (like consumers). See","paragraph_id":"para_604"},{"text":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e. These principles","paragraph_id":"para_605"},{"text":"align with developments in our caselaw. See Bright, 20 Haw. at","paragraph_id":"para_606"},{"text":"512; Masaki, 71 Haw. at 10-11, 780 P.2d at 572-73. Hawaiʻi","paragraph_id":"para_607"},{"text":"courts may award punitive damages for negligence or strict","paragraph_id":"para_608"},{"text":"products liability to deter socially harmful conduct. See","paragraph_id":"para_609"},{"text":"Masaki, 71 Haw. at 10-11, 780 P.2d at 572-73. Thus, “malicious”","paragraph_id":"para_610"},{"text":"and “outrageous” retain vitality in our punitive damages","paragraph_id":"para_611"},{"text":"framework.","paragraph_id":"para_612"},{"text":"The Restatement (Third) of Torts acknowledges the social","paragraph_id":"para_613"},{"text":"loss caused by outrageous or malicious conduct, even if the","paragraph_id":"para_614"},{"text":"tortfeasor did not act with intent or recklessness. See","paragraph_id":"para_615"},{"text":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e. The Third","paragraph_id":"para_616"},{"text":"Restatement explains that the mental states set forth in","paragraph_id":"para_617"},{"text":"§ 39(a)(2) include harms to the plaintiff “or others.”","paragraph_id":"para_618"},{"text":"Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39, cmt. e. It tagged “or","paragraph_id":"para_619"},{"text":"others” to the reckless definition because “recklessness is","paragraph_id":"para_620"},{"text":"rarely directed at any specific target. A reckless driver","paragraph_id":"para_621"},{"text":"endangers everyone in the same segment of highway, and a","paragraph_id":"para_622"},{"text":"manufacturer who sells a defective product endangers everyone","paragraph_id":"para_623"},{"text":"who uses the product.” Id. Thus, broader harms (or risk of","paragraph_id":"para_624"},{"text":"harm) to society as a whole justify punitive damages. See id.","paragraph_id":"para_625"},{"text":"23","paragraph_id":"para_626"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_627"},{"text":"Developments to the ALI’s punitive damages principles show","paragraph_id":"para_628"},{"text":"the remedy’s value to redress broad social harms - beyond","paragraph_id":"para_629"},{"text":"discouraging socially undesireable behaviors directed at others.","paragraph_id":"para_630"},{"text":"See David J. Gilmartin, Status and Trends in State Product","paragraph_id":"para_631"},{"text":"Liability Law: Punitive Damages, 14 J. of Legis. 249, 250 (1987)","paragraph_id":"para_632"},{"text":"(“One primary objective of the deterrent function is to prevent","paragraph_id":"para_633"},{"text":"businesses from treating compensatory damages as a cost of doing","paragraph_id":"para_634"},{"text":"business.”). Scholars have also commented on the shift from the","paragraph_id":"para_635"},{"text":"“narrow band of malicious, intentionally wrongful conduct” to","paragraph_id":"para_636"},{"text":"“‘reckless’ conduct, performed with lack of attention to the","paragraph_id":"para_637"},{"text":"consequences for the health and safety of others in society.”","paragraph_id":"para_638"},{"text":"Catherine M. Sharkey, Punitive Damages Transformed into Societal","paragraph_id":"para_639"},{"text":"Damages, in Punishment and Private Law 155, 161 (Elise Bant,","paragraph_id":"para_640"},{"text":"Wayne Courtney, James Goudkamp & Jeannie Marie Paterson eds.,","paragraph_id":"para_641"},{"text":"2021). Redressing social harms, a goal advanced by product","paragraph_id":"para_642"},{"text":"liability cases, shapes punitive damages’ purpose beyond","paragraph_id":"para_643"},{"text":"retribution, the “cruelty between individuals.” See id.","paragraph_id":"para_644"},{"text":"An attention to social cost fits our caselaw. See Bright,","paragraph_id":"para_645"},{"text":"20 Haw. at 512; Masaki, 71 Haw. at 10-11, 780 P.2d at 572-73.","paragraph_id":"para_646"},{"text":"If the conduct is malicious or outrageous, then punitive damages","paragraph_id":"para_647"},{"text":"may be awarded for negligence or strict products liability.","paragraph_id":"para_648"},{"text":"Masaki, 71 Haw. at 10-11, 780 P.2d at 572-73 (“So long as the","paragraph_id":"para_649"},{"text":"plaintiff established the requisite ‘outrageous’ conduct[] . . .","paragraph_id":"para_650"},{"text":"there was no reason to disallow an award of punitive damages in","paragraph_id":"para_651"},{"text":"24","paragraph_id":"para_652"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_653"},{"text":"a negligence or strict liability action.”); see Bright, 20 Haw.","paragraph_id":"para_654"},{"text":"at 512 (negligent defendant “continued on his way in his","paragraph_id":"para_655"},{"text":"automobile without stopping to render assistance or make any","paragraph_id":"para_656"},{"text":"inquiries” after causing accident with a street car).","paragraph_id":"para_657"},{"text":"The Third Restatement’s approach also aids the advancement","paragraph_id":"para_658"},{"text":"and understanding of Hawaiʻi’s common law. States of mind like","paragraph_id":"para_659"},{"text":"“malice” and “wanton” are hard to pin down. See Randall H.","paragraph_id":"para_660"},{"text":"Endo, Punitive Damages in Hawaii: Curbing Unwarranted Expansion,","paragraph_id":"para_661"},{"text":"13 U. Haw. L. Rev. 659, 673-74 (1991). “Hawaii’s verbose","paragraph_id":"para_662"},{"text":"standard [still] includes terms such as ‘willful,’ ‘wanton,’","paragraph_id":"para_663"},{"text":"‘oppressive,’ and ‘malicious’ . . . [but] these terms are not","paragraph_id":"para_664"},{"text":"clearly defined.” Id. And unlike some other states, Hawaiʻi","paragraph_id":"para_665"},{"text":"lacks statutory definitions covering the elements of punitive","paragraph_id":"para_666"},{"text":"awards. Id. at 673 n.97; see, e.g., Cal. Civ. Code § 3294","paragraph_id":"para_667"},{"text":"(allowing punitive damages for “oppression, fraud, or malice,”","paragraph_id":"para_668"},{"text":"and defining those statutory terms).","paragraph_id":"para_669"},{"text":"Punitive damages are civil, yet quasi-criminal in their","paragraph_id":"para_670"},{"text":"purpose and effect. See Restatement (Third) of Torts, § 39,","paragraph_id":"para_671"},{"text":"cmt. f (supporters of higher burdens of proof in punitive","paragraph_id":"para_672"},{"text":"damages point to the “quasi-criminal nature of a punitive-","paragraph_id":"para_673"},{"text":"damages determination”); Masaki, 71 Haw. at 16, 780 P.2d at 575","paragraph_id":"para_674"},{"text":"(“[P]unitive damages are a form of punishment and can stigmatize","paragraph_id":"para_675"},{"text":"the defendant in much the same way as a criminal conviction.”).","paragraph_id":"para_676"},{"text":"25","paragraph_id":"para_677"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_678"},{"text":"Thus, we believe it’s useful to look back at the removal of","paragraph_id":"para_679"},{"text":"“malice” from criminal law. It resembles similar improvements","paragraph_id":"para_680"},{"text":"identified by the ALI to civil law.","paragraph_id":"para_681"},{"text":"Terms like “malice” and “wanton” once were criminal law","paragraph_id":"para_682"},{"text":"staples. In 1962, though, the Model Penal Code decommissioned","paragraph_id":"para_683"},{"text":"“malice.” See Paul H. Robinson & Markus D. Dubber, The American","paragraph_id":"para_684"},{"text":"Model Penal Code: A Brief Overview, 10 New Crim. L. Rev. 319,","paragraph_id":"para_685"},{"text":"334 (2007). Malice had long separated murder from manslaughter.","paragraph_id":"para_686"},{"text":"Id. But the concept became obsolete for criminal law purposes.","paragraph_id":"para_687"},{"text":"Id. “In criminal law - where malice once enjoyed historical","paragraph_id":"para_688"},{"text":"prominence - contemporary commentators have dismissed malice as","paragraph_id":"para_689"},{"text":"an opaque ‘legal term of art with little connection to its non-","paragraph_id":"para_690"},{"text":"legal meaning.’” Marc O. DeGirolami, Reconstructing Malice in","paragraph_id":"para_691"},{"text":"the Law of Punitive Damages, 14 J. Tort L. 193, 205 (2021).","paragraph_id":"para_692"},{"text":"Pre-statehood criminal law in Hawaiʻi used the term “malice”","paragraph_id":"para_693"},{"text":"to classify homicides. For instance, the Supreme Court of the","paragraph_id":"para_694"},{"text":"Kingdom of Hawaiʻi ruled that absent “malice aforethought,” a","paragraph_id":"para_695"},{"text":"jailer’s deadly blow to an inmate was manslaughter, not murder.","paragraph_id":"para_696"},{"text":"The King v. Sherman, 1 Haw. 88, 88 (Haw. Kingdom 1853). After","paragraph_id":"para_697"},{"text":"the overthrow, the Revised Laws of Hawaiʻi provided that","paragraph_id":"para_698"},{"text":"“[w]hoever kills a human being without malice aforethought and","paragraph_id":"para_699"},{"text":"without authority, justification or extenuation by law is guilty","paragraph_id":"para_700"},{"text":"of the offense of manslaughter.” Territory v. Braly, 29 Haw. 7,","paragraph_id":"para_701"},{"text":"12 (Haw. Terr. 1926) (citing Revised Laws of Hawaiʻi § 4119","paragraph_id":"para_702"},{"text":"26","paragraph_id":"para_703"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_704"},{"text":"(1925)). “[M]alice is the element which distinguishes murder","paragraph_id":"para_705"},{"text":"from manslaughter.” Territory v. Alcantara, 24 Haw. 197, 200","paragraph_id":"para_706"},{"text":"(Haw. Terr. 1918). Then during early statehood, “malice","paragraph_id":"para_707"},{"text":"aforethought” endured as murder’s state of mind. State v.","paragraph_id":"para_708"},{"text":"Moeller, 50 Haw. 110, 116, 433 P.2d 136, 141 (1967).","paragraph_id":"para_709"},{"text":"In 1972, the Hawaiʻi Penal Code detached “malice” and its","paragraph_id":"para_710"},{"text":"cognates. The state of mind associated with “evil motive,”","paragraph_id":"para_711"},{"text":"“ill-will,” and “spite” was out. Also out were other outmoded","paragraph_id":"para_712"},{"text":"terms, “wanton” and “wilful.” Four mental states,","paragraph_id":"para_713"},{"text":"“intentionally,” “knowingly,” “recklessly,” and “negligently,”","paragraph_id":"para_714"},{"text":"were in. 1972 Haw. Sess. Laws Act 9, § 206 at 43.","paragraph_id":"para_715"},{"text":"Turning to the civil justice system, malice has long guided","paragraph_id":"para_716"},{"text":"punitive damages. See Bright, 20 Haw. at 512; Lake Shore & M.S.","paragraph_id":"para_717"},{"text":"Ry. Co. v. Prentice, 147 U.S. 101, 107 (1893). Yet “malice” is","paragraph_id":"para_718"},{"text":"ill-defined. While “malice as a textual element of punitive","paragraph_id":"para_719"},{"text":"damages is practically ubiquitous, there is, at present, no","paragraph_id":"para_720"},{"text":"cohesive account of what malice means.” DeGirolami, supra, at","paragraph_id":"para_721"},{"text":"198.","paragraph_id":"para_722"},{"text":"In Bright, the court adopted “malice” as a feature of","paragraph_id":"para_723"},{"text":"punitive damages. It quoted an 1893 U.S. Supreme Court case to","paragraph_id":"para_724"},{"text":"hold that a court may award punitive damages if the defendant","paragraph_id":"para_725"},{"text":"“has acted wantonly or oppressively or with such malice as","paragraph_id":"para_726"},{"text":"implies a spirit of mischief or criminal indifference to civil","paragraph_id":"para_727"},{"text":"obligations.” See Bright, 20 Haw. at 512 (quoting Prentice, 147","paragraph_id":"para_728"},{"text":"27","paragraph_id":"para_729"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_730"},{"text":"U.S. at 107). Bright then quoted another Supreme Court case to","paragraph_id":"para_731"},{"text":"complete the second part of its punitive damages test: punitive","paragraph_id":"para_732"},{"text":"damages may also be awarded where there has been “some wilful","paragraph_id":"para_733"},{"text":"misconduct or that entire want of care which would raise the","paragraph_id":"para_734"},{"text":"presumption of a conscious indifference to consequences.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_735"},{"text":"(quoting Milwaukee & St. P.R. Co. v. Arms, 91 U.S. 489, 495","paragraph_id":"para_736"},{"text":"(1875)). Decades later, Masaki recited this standard word for","paragraph_id":"para_737"},{"text":"word:","paragraph_id":"para_738"},{"text":"The plaintiff must prove by clear and convincing","paragraph_id":"para_739"},{"text":"evidence that the defendant has acted wantonly or","paragraph_id":"para_740"},{"text":"oppressively or with such malice as implies a spirit of","paragraph_id":"para_741"},{"text":"mischief or criminal indifference to civil obligations, or","paragraph_id":"para_742"},{"text":"where there has been some wilful misconduct or that entire","paragraph_id":"para_743"},{"text":"want of care which would raise the presumption of a","paragraph_id":"para_744"},{"text":"conscious indifference to consequences.","paragraph_id":"para_745"},{"text":"71 Haw. at 16-17, 780 P.2d at 575 (citing Bright, 20 Haw. at","paragraph_id":"para_746"},{"text":"512).","paragraph_id":"para_747"},{"text":"Since the late 1800s, our caselaw has stuck to “wantonly,”","paragraph_id":"para_748"},{"text":"“oppressively,” “malice,” and “wilful.” Bright imitated the","paragraph_id":"para_749"},{"text":"federal standard. See Bright, 20 Haw. at 512. But since","paragraph_id":"para_750"},{"text":"Bright, this court has not distinctively defined these terms.","paragraph_id":"para_751"},{"text":"See Masaki, 71 Haw. at 16-17, 780 P.2d at 575; Chin Kee v.","paragraph_id":"para_752"},{"text":"Kaeleku Sugar Co., Ltd., 29 Haw. 524, 532 (Haw. Terr. 1926)","paragraph_id":"para_753"},{"text":"(“This court has further held that vindictive damages are","paragraph_id":"para_754"},{"text":"recoverable in actions of tort when the defendant’s misconduct","paragraph_id":"para_755"},{"text":"has been wilful or when he has acted with a reckless","paragraph_id":"para_756"},{"text":"indifference to the rights of others.”); Goo v. Continental Cas.","paragraph_id":"para_757"},{"text":"28","paragraph_id":"para_758"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_759"},{"text":"Co., 52 Haw. 235, 239, 473 P.2d 563, 566 (1970) (“In this","paragraph_id":"para_760"},{"text":"jurisdiction we have long recognized the wisdom of allowing","paragraph_id":"para_761"},{"text":"punitive damages for willful, malicious, wanton or aggravated","paragraph_id":"para_762"},{"text":"wrongs where a defendant has acted with a reckless indifference","paragraph_id":"para_763"},{"text":"to the rights of another.”).","paragraph_id":"para_764"},{"text":"Then, those terms made more sense. But today, where the","paragraph_id":"para_765"},{"text":"law has regrounded mental states for precision and relevance to","paragraph_id":"para_766"},{"text":"modern times, they no longer fit. “Malice,” along with","paragraph_id":"para_767"},{"text":"“wantonly” and “oppressively,” have a dated quality unhelpful to","paragraph_id":"para_768"},{"text":"the contemporary fact-finder. As one commentator put it: “To","paragraph_id":"para_769"},{"text":"define these terms as conduct which ‘implies a spirit of","paragraph_id":"para_770"},{"text":"mischief or criminal indifference to civil obligations,’ does","paragraph_id":"para_771"},{"text":"not significantly help the trier of fact to determine punitive","paragraph_id":"para_772"},{"text":"damage liability.” Endo, supra, at 673 n.99; see Masaki, 71","paragraph_id":"para_773"},{"text":"Haw. at 11, 780 P.2d at 572. We believe that clearer","paragraph_id":"para_774"},{"text":"definitions will help sharpen the punitive damages inquiry and","paragraph_id":"para_775"},{"text":"better assist juries.","paragraph_id":"para_776"},{"text":"Our civil jury instructions reflect the unwieldy present","paragraph_id":"para_777"},{"text":"standard. The Pattern Civil Jury Instruction on punitive","paragraph_id":"para_778"},{"text":"damages – last updated last century - has clunky subparts.","paragraph_id":"para_779"},{"text":"Wordy definitions populate the law that our courts command","paragraph_id":"para_780"},{"text":"jurors to follow. For example, “[a]n act is ‘wanton’ when it is","paragraph_id":"para_781"},{"text":"reckless, heedless, or characterized by extreme foolhardiness,","paragraph_id":"para_782"},{"text":"or callous disregard of, or callous indifference to, the rights","paragraph_id":"para_783"},{"text":"29","paragraph_id":"para_784"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_785"},{"text":"or safety of others.” Pattern Civil Jury Instruction 8.14.","paragraph_id":"para_786"},{"text":"Also, “[a]n act is ‘willful’ when it is premeditated, unlawful,","paragraph_id":"para_787"},{"text":"without legal justification, or done with an evil intent, with a","paragraph_id":"para_788"},{"text":"bad motive or purpose, or with indifference to its natural","paragraph_id":"para_789"},{"text":"consequences.” Pattern Civil Jury Instruction 8.13. And “[a]n","paragraph_id":"para_790"},{"text":"act is ‘malicious’ when it is prompted or accompanied by ill","paragraph_id":"para_791"},{"text":"will or spite.” Pattern Civil Jury Instruction 8.16. These","paragraph_id":"para_792"},{"text":"arcane, multi-part definitions are apt to vex jurors and muddle","paragraph_id":"para_793"},{"text":"the punitive damages question.","paragraph_id":"para_794"},{"text":"This court has long-respected the ALI’s analysis of common","paragraph_id":"para_795"},{"text":"law advancements to tort law. Bynum recapped instances when","paragraph_id":"para_796"},{"text":"this court relied on the Restatement (Second) of Torts to","paragraph_id":"para_797"},{"text":"advance common law doctrines:","paragraph_id":"para_798"},{"text":"This court has many times relied on the Restatement","paragraph_id":"para_799"},{"text":"(Second) of Torts as persuasive authority. See, e.g., Hac","paragraph_id":"para_800"},{"text":"v. Univ. of Hawaiʻi, 102 Hawaiʻi 92, 106, 73 P.3d 46, 60","paragraph_id":"para_801"},{"text":"(2003) (adopting elements and approach of Restatement","paragraph_id":"para_802"},{"text":"(Second) of Torts § 46 (1965) for tort of intentional","paragraph_id":"para_803"},{"text":"infliction of emotional distress); Knodle v. Waikiki","paragraph_id":"para_804"},{"text":"Gateway Hotel, Inc., 69 Haw. 376, 386, 742 P.2d 377, 384","paragraph_id":"para_805"},{"text":"(1987) (relying on Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314(A)","paragraph_id":"para_806"},{"text":"(1965) to establish the duty of innkeeper to guest “to take","paragraph_id":"para_807"},{"text":"reasonable action to protect the latter against","paragraph_id":"para_808"},{"text":"unreasonable risk of physical harm”); Ono v. Applegate, 62","paragraph_id":"para_809"},{"text":"Haw. 131, 137–38, 612 P.2d 533, 539 (1980) (citing","paragraph_id":"para_810"},{"text":"Restatement (Second) of Torts § 285 (1965) to hold that","paragraph_id":"para_811"},{"text":"Hawaiʻi’s “liquor control statute does impose a duty upon a","paragraph_id":"para_812"},{"text":"tavern keeper not to serve a person under the influence of","paragraph_id":"para_813"},{"text":"liquor”); Stewart v. Budget Rent–A–Car Corp., 52 Haw. 71,","paragraph_id":"para_814"},{"text":"75, 470 P.2d 240, 243 (1970) (adopting Restatement (Second)","paragraph_id":"para_815"},{"text":"of Torts § 402A (1965) for strict products liability); and","paragraph_id":"para_816"},{"text":"Chun v. Park, 51 Haw. 462, 468, 462 P.2d 905, 909 (1969)","paragraph_id":"para_817"},{"text":"(adopting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 (Tentative","paragraph_id":"para_818"},{"text":"Draft No. 12, 1966) as “a fair and just restatement of the","paragraph_id":"para_819"},{"text":"law on the issue of negligent misrepresentation”).","paragraph_id":"para_820"},{"text":"See Bynum, 106 Hawaiʻi at 86 n.12, 101 P.3d at 1154 n.12.","paragraph_id":"para_821"},{"text":"30","paragraph_id":"para_822"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_823"},{"text":"To propel Hawaiʻi’s punitive damages standard to","paragraph_id":"para_824"},{"text":"contemporary times, we rely on the Restatement again.","paragraph_id":"para_825"},{"text":"The ALI’s latest revision offers a clearer mental standard","paragraph_id":"para_826"},{"text":"for courts, parties, and jurors. In contrast, malice with its","paragraph_id":"para_827"},{"text":"“evil motive” and other similar mental states lack practical","paragraph_id":"para_828"},{"text":"applicability and precision. See Restatement (Third) of Torts,","paragraph_id":"para_829"},{"text":"§ 39, cmt. e. The ALI recast punitive damages to be “more","paragraph_id":"para_830"},{"text":"consistent with the [Restatement’s] general approach to mental","paragraph_id":"para_831"},{"text":"states and tortious conduct.” Id. We agree.","paragraph_id":"para_832"},{"text":"Still, as mentioned, we do not completely discard long-","paragraph_id":"para_833"},{"text":"standing punitive damages concepts like “malicious” and","paragraph_id":"para_834"},{"text":"“outrageous.” Retaining malicious and outrageous conduct in our","paragraph_id":"para_835"},{"text":"law protects inclusion of wide-ranging conduct that may justify","paragraph_id":"para_836"},{"text":"punitive damages awards. See Restatement (Third) of Torts,","paragraph_id":"para_837"},{"text":"§ 39, cmt. e (“The standards stated here retain outrageousness","paragraph_id":"para_838"},{"text":"and malice as necessary backups for the inevitable ambiguities","paragraph_id":"para_839"},{"text":"of these categories as applied to widely varied fact","paragraph_id":"para_840"},{"text":"patterns.”).","paragraph_id":"para_841"},{"text":"This “catch all” is important because Hawaiʻi law allows","paragraph_id":"para_842"},{"text":"punitive damages for negligent torts. See Masaki, 71 Haw. at 4-","paragraph_id":"para_843"},{"text":"5, 780 P.2d at 569-70. Thus, we believe that negligent torts","paragraph_id":"para_844"},{"text":"and strict liability torts committed in a “malicious” or","paragraph_id":"para_845"},{"text":"“outrageous” manner may support a punitive damages award. See","paragraph_id":"para_846"},{"text":"id.","paragraph_id":"para_847"},{"text":"31","paragraph_id":"para_848"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_849"},{"text":"Last, we address the need for a plaintiff to establish","paragraph_id":"para_850"},{"text":"recoverable tort liability. This requirement focuses on some","paragraph_id":"para_851"},{"text":"form of recoverable liability (either in equity, or via nominal","paragraph_id":"para_852"},{"text":"damages), but does not necessarily require compensatory damages.","paragraph_id":"para_853"},{"text":"Because this court has previously held that plaintiffs may","paragraph_id":"para_854"},{"text":"recover punitive damages without establishing compensatory","paragraph_id":"para_855"},{"text":"damages, this standard aligns with our caselaw. See Howell v.","paragraph_id":"para_856"},{"text":"Associated Hotels, Ltd., 40 Haw. 492, 500 (Haw. Terr. 1954) (“In","paragraph_id":"para_857"},{"text":"other words, where the plaintiff had proved a violation of a","paragraph_id":"para_858"},{"text":"legal right, [they] should be able to recover punitive damages","paragraph_id":"para_859"},{"text":"if the case is such as would call for punitive damages.”).","paragraph_id":"para_860"},{"text":"“Punitive or exemplary damages are generally defined as those","paragraph_id":"para_861"},{"text":"damages assessed in addition to compensatory damages for the","paragraph_id":"para_862"},{"text":"purpose of punishing the defendant for aggravated or outrageous","paragraph_id":"para_863"},{"text":"misconduct and to deter the defendant and others from similar","paragraph_id":"para_864"},{"text":"conduct in the future.” Masaki, 71 Haw. at 6, 780 P.2d at 570","paragraph_id":"para_865"},{"text":"(emphasis added) (citing D. Dobbs, Handbook on the Law of","paragraph_id":"para_866"},{"text":"Remedies, § 3.9, at 204 (1973); Restatement (Second) of Torts","paragraph_id":"para_867"},{"text":"§ 908 (1979)). Thus, while compensatory damages are not a","paragraph_id":"para_868"},{"text":"prerequisite for punitive damages, plaintiffs must establish","paragraph_id":"para_869"},{"text":"recoverable tort liability.","paragraph_id":"para_870"},{"text":"We hold that a plaintiff must (1) establish recoverable","paragraph_id":"para_871"},{"text":"tort liability, and (2) establish by clear and convincing","paragraph_id":"para_872"},{"text":"evidence that the defendant intended to harm the plaintiff or","paragraph_id":"para_873"},{"text":"32","paragraph_id":"para_874"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_875"},{"text":"others, or recklessly disregarded a substantial risk of harm to","paragraph_id":"para_876"},{"text":"the plaintiff or others, or otherwise acted in an outrageous or","paragraph_id":"para_877"},{"text":"malicious manner.","paragraph_id":"para_878"},{"text":"3. The Punitive Damages Evidentiary Standard","paragraph_id":"para_879"},{"text":"We now turn to the plaintiff’s burden of proof to get the","paragraph_id":"para_880"},{"text":"punitive damages issue before the jury.","paragraph_id":"para_881"},{"text":"In a jury trial, a judge first determines as a matter of","paragraph_id":"para_882"},{"text":"law whether to allow the jury to consider punitive damages. A","paragraph_id":"para_883"},{"text":"plaintiff must present sufficient evidence to support a factual","paragraph_id":"para_884"},{"text":"finding that a defendant acted with “inten[t] to harm the","paragraph_id":"para_885"},{"text":"plaintiff or others, recklessly disregarded a substantial risk","paragraph_id":"para_886"},{"text":"of harm to the plaintiff or others, or otherwise acted in an","paragraph_id":"para_887"},{"text":"outrageous or malicious manner.” See Restatement (Third) of","paragraph_id":"para_888"},{"text":"Torts § 39(a)(2).","paragraph_id":"para_889"},{"text":"Here, the circuit court granted Robert’s JMOL dismissing","paragraph_id":"para_890"},{"text":"Roland’s punitive damages issue. Hawaiʻi Rules of Civil","paragraph_id":"para_891"},{"text":"Procedure (HRCP) Rule 50, Judgment as a Matter of Law guides the","paragraph_id":"para_892"},{"text":"sufficient evidence inquiry. HRCP Rule 50(a)(1) reads:","paragraph_id":"para_893"},{"text":"If during a trial by jury a party has been fully heard on","paragraph_id":"para_894"},{"text":"an issue and there is no legally sufficient evidentiary","paragraph_id":"para_895"},{"text":"basis for a reasonable jury to find for that party on that","paragraph_id":"para_896"},{"text":"issue, the court may determine the issue against that party","paragraph_id":"para_897"},{"text":"and may grant a motion for judgment as a matter of law","paragraph_id":"para_898"},{"text":"against that party with respect to a claim or defense that","paragraph_id":"para_899"},{"text":"cannot under the controlling law be maintained or defeated","paragraph_id":"para_900"},{"text":"without a favorable finding on that issue.","paragraph_id":"para_901"},{"text":"(Emphasis added.)","paragraph_id":"para_902"},{"text":"33","paragraph_id":"para_903"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_904"},{"text":"Only if all the evidence and its reasonable inferences,","paragraph_id":"para_905"},{"text":"viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, reveal “no evidence to support","paragraph_id":"para_906"},{"text":"a jury verdict” on punitive damages, does a defendant win a","paragraph_id":"para_907"},{"text":"motion for judgment as a matter of law regarding punitive","paragraph_id":"para_908"},{"text":"damages. See Miyamoto v. Lum, 104 Hawaiʻi 1, 7, 84 P.3d 509, 515","paragraph_id":"para_909"},{"text":"(2004).","paragraph_id":"para_910"},{"text":"A circuit court does not determine whether a jury could","paragraph_id":"para_911"},{"text":"find punitive damages by clear and convincing evidence. Goran","paragraph_id":"para_912"},{"text":"Pleho, LLC v. Lacy, 144 Hawaiʻi 224, 239-40, 439 P.3d 176, 191-92","paragraph_id":"para_913"},{"text":"(2019). The trial court does not assess the burden of proof.","paragraph_id":"para_914"},{"text":"Rather, the court simply determines if there is any legally","paragraph_id":"para_915"},{"text":"sufficient evidence to instruct the jury on punitive damages.","paragraph_id":"para_916"},{"text":"The jury then evaluates the quality of that evidence and whether","paragraph_id":"para_917"},{"text":"it meets the clear and convincing standard. See Goo, 52 Haw. at","paragraph_id":"para_918"},{"text":"239, 473 P.2d at 566; Masaki, 71 Haw. at 26, 780 P.2d at 580.","paragraph_id":"para_919"},{"text":"4. The circuit court erred in granting Robert’s JMOL on","paragraph_id":"para_920"},{"text":"punitive damages because Roland presented sufficient","paragraph_id":"para_921"},{"text":"evidence to support a punitive damages finding","paragraph_id":"para_922"},{"text":"We agree with the ICA that punitive damages should’ve gone","paragraph_id":"para_923"},{"text":"to the jury.","paragraph_id":"para_924"},{"text":"After the evidence closed, Robert moved for JMOL as to","paragraph_id":"para_925"},{"text":"punitive damages. The court granted the motion. So the jury","paragraph_id":"para_926"},{"text":"heard nothing about punitive damages.","paragraph_id":"para_927"},{"text":"34","paragraph_id":"para_928"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_929"},{"text":"Appellate courts review a trial court’s JMOL rulings anew.","paragraph_id":"para_930"},{"text":"Ray v. Kapiolani Med. Specialists, 125 Hawaiʻi 253, 261, 259 P.3d","paragraph_id":"para_931"},{"text":"569, 577 (2011). A court must deny a JMOL regarding punitive","paragraph_id":"para_932"},{"text":"damages if there is any evidence that supports that remedy. See","paragraph_id":"para_933"},{"text":"HRCP Rule 50(a)(1); Miyamoto, 104 Hawaiʻi at 7, 84 P.3d at 515","paragraph_id":"para_934"},{"text":"(JMOL is only appropriate if there is no evidence to support a","paragraph_id":"para_935"},{"text":"jury verdict). The circuit court’s standard is whether there is","paragraph_id":"para_936"},{"text":"“sufficient evidence,” not whether there is “clear and","paragraph_id":"para_937"},{"text":"convincing” evidence. Goran Pleho, LLC, 144 Hawaiʻi at 239-40,","paragraph_id":"para_938"},{"text":"439 P.3d at 191-92.","paragraph_id":"para_939"},{"text":"Under Masaki, the circuit court erred by granting Robert’s","paragraph_id":"para_940"},{"text":"JMOL. There was sufficient evidence to instruct a jury on","paragraph_id":"para_941"},{"text":"punitive damages. Also, under the standard we adopt today,","paragraph_id":"para_942"},{"text":"Roland presented evidence that a jury could find that Robert","paragraph_id":"para_943"},{"text":"intended to harm Roland, that he recklessly disregarded the risk","paragraph_id":"para_944"},{"text":"of harm to Roland, or that he acted in an outrageous or","paragraph_id":"para_945"},{"text":"malicious manner. Restatement (Third) of Torts § 39(a)(2).","paragraph_id":"para_946"},{"text":"Roland identified five evidentiary areas that may merit a","paragraph_id":"para_947"},{"text":"punitive damages award. First, Roland presented evidence that","paragraph_id":"para_948"},{"text":"Robert “stole” the King Street shop from Guieb Inc., decreasing","paragraph_id":"para_949"},{"text":"the corporation’s annual revenue by hundreds of thousands of","paragraph_id":"para_950"},{"text":"dollars. Second, Roland elicited evidence to suggest that","paragraph_id":"para_951"},{"text":"Robert misappropriated the Guieb Inc. trade name “Exhaust","paragraph_id":"para_952"},{"text":"Systems Hawaii” because Robert’s own company, Guieb Group, used","paragraph_id":"para_953"},{"text":"35","paragraph_id":"para_954"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_955"},{"text":"the trade name “Exhaust Systems Kalihi Kai” without Roland’s","paragraph_id":"para_956"},{"text":"permission.","paragraph_id":"para_957"},{"text":"Third, Roland showed that Robert hired away “valued","paragraph_id":"para_958"},{"text":"employees” from Guieb Inc. for his own business (Guieb Group);","paragraph_id":"para_959"},{"text":"one an experienced general manager who made the King Street shop","paragraph_id":"para_960"},{"text":"especially profitable. Fourth, Roland presented evidence that","paragraph_id":"para_961"},{"text":"Robert “drastically” reduced his salary. Last, Roland presented","paragraph_id":"para_962"},{"text":"evidence to suggest that Robert manipulated Guieb Inc. and Guieb","paragraph_id":"para_963"},{"text":"Groups’s advertising costs so that Guieb Inc. paid more than its","paragraph_id":"para_964"},{"text":"share.","paragraph_id":"para_965"},{"text":"Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to non-","paragraph_id":"para_966"},{"text":"movant Roland, we conclude there was sufficient evidence to send","paragraph_id":"para_967"},{"text":"the punitive damages question to the jury. Again, the court","paragraph_id":"para_968"},{"text":"does not decide whether Roland wins under the “clear and","paragraph_id":"para_969"},{"text":"convincing” standard. Here, because there was some evidence","paragraph_id":"para_970"},{"text":"that may support a jury verdict, punitive damages should go to","paragraph_id":"para_971"},{"text":"the jury. See HRCP Rule 50(a)(1); Miyamoto, 104 Hawaiʻi at 7, 84","paragraph_id":"para_972"},{"text":"P.3d at 515.","paragraph_id":"para_973"},{"text":"We hold that there was sufficient evidence to instruct the","paragraph_id":"para_974"},{"text":"jury on punitive damages. We affirm the ICA’s judgment on this","paragraph_id":"para_975"},{"text":"issue and remand for further proceedings.","paragraph_id":"para_976"},{"text":"C. The ICA Wrongly Held that a Kinship Fiduciary Duty Exists","paragraph_id":"para_977"},{"text":"Hawaiʻi does not recognize a fiduciary duty based solely on","paragraph_id":"para_978"},{"text":"kinship. We decline to do so now.","paragraph_id":"para_979"},{"text":"36","paragraph_id":"para_980"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_981"},{"text":"The closest Hawaiʻi has to a kinship fiduciary duty is a","paragraph_id":"para_982"},{"text":"constructive trust based largely on the “confidential","paragraph_id":"para_983"},{"text":"relationship” between family members. See Kam Oi Lee v. Fong","paragraph_id":"para_984"},{"text":"Wong, 57 Haw. 137, 139, 552 P.2d 635, 637 (1976). That","paragraph_id":"para_985"},{"text":"constructive trust, though, requires a promise to hold or convey","paragraph_id":"para_986"},{"text":"property. See id. at 139-40, 552 P.2d at 637-38. Those facts","paragraph_id":"para_987"},{"text":"don’t exist in Roland and Robert’s case.","paragraph_id":"para_988"},{"text":"Kam Oi Lee recognized that a confidential relationship may","paragraph_id":"para_989"},{"text":"impose a fiduciary duty. Id. at 139, 552 P.2d at 637. The case","paragraph_id":"para_990"},{"text":"involved a constructive trust between a father and his children.","paragraph_id":"para_991"},{"text":"Id. They held interest in the same property as tenants in","paragraph_id":"para_992"},{"text":"common. Id. at 138, 552 P.2d at 637. The children signed a","paragraph_id":"para_993"},{"text":"quitclaim deed because the father promised he would sell the","paragraph_id":"para_994"},{"text":"property and transfer the children’s share of the proceeds to","paragraph_id":"para_995"},{"text":"them. Id. However, the father left the property to his second","paragraph_id":"para_996"},{"text":"wife when he passed away a year later. Id. at 138-39, 552 P.2d","paragraph_id":"para_997"},{"text":"at 637. This court held that the children could recover under a","paragraph_id":"para_998"},{"text":"constructive trust arising from an abuse of a confidential","paragraph_id":"para_999"},{"text":"relationship. Id. at 142, 552 P.2d at 640.","paragraph_id":"para_1000"},{"text":"“A constructive trust arises where a person holding title","paragraph_id":"para_1001"},{"text":"to property is subject to an equitable duty to convey it to","paragraph_id":"para_1002"},{"text":"another on the ground that [they] would be unjustly enriched if","paragraph_id":"para_1003"},{"text":"[they] were permitted to retain it.” Id. at 139, 552 P.2d at","paragraph_id":"para_1004"},{"text":"637. To apply an “‘abuse of confidence’ constructive trust,” a","paragraph_id":"para_1005"},{"text":"37","paragraph_id":"para_1006"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_1007"},{"text":"party had to show: “(1) a confidential relationship; (2)","paragraph_id":"para_1008"},{"text":"conveyance to the grantee based upon, and arising out of a","paragraph_id":"para_1009"},{"text":"confidential relationship; (3) a promise to hold for, or","paragraph_id":"para_1010"},{"text":"reconvey to, the grantor or a third person; and (4) a subsequent","paragraph_id":"para_1011"},{"text":"refusal to reconvey resulting in the grantee’s unjust","paragraph_id":"para_1012"},{"text":"enrichment.” Id. at 140, 552 P.2d at 638.","paragraph_id":"para_1013"},{"text":"“Kinship, by itself, is not sufficient to establish a","paragraph_id":"para_1014"},{"text":"confidential relationship[,]” Kam Oi Lee explained. Id.","paragraph_id":"para_1015"},{"text":"“However, when parties are closely related, the imposition of","paragraph_id":"para_1016"},{"text":"great trust and the letting down of all guards is natural, and","paragraph_id":"para_1017"},{"text":"the relationship, coupled with evidence as to intrusting, the","paragraph_id":"para_1018"},{"text":"status of the parties as to health, age, education and","paragraph_id":"para_1019"},{"text":"dominance, may lead a court to find that a confidential","paragraph_id":"para_1020"},{"text":"relationship existed.” Id. Because the father “exercise[d]","paragraph_id":"para_1021"},{"text":"influence and dominion over his children[,]” and the children","paragraph_id":"para_1022"},{"text":"trusted that their father would act in their best interests,","paragraph_id":"para_1023"},{"text":"there was a confidential relationship. Id. at 141, 552 P.2d at","paragraph_id":"para_1024"},{"text":"639. Failure to sell the property and transfer the proceeds to","paragraph_id":"para_1025"},{"text":"the children constituted an abuse justifying imposition of a","paragraph_id":"para_1026"},{"text":"constructive trust. See id. at 142, 552 P.2d at 640.","paragraph_id":"para_1027"},{"text":"The constructive trust in Kam Oi Lee that created a","paragraph_id":"para_1028"},{"text":"fiduciary duty to convey real property is not the same as the","paragraph_id":"para_1029"},{"text":"Guieb brothers’ business partnership. The Guiebs were just two","paragraph_id":"para_1030"},{"text":"brothers who grew an automotive business together and grew apart","paragraph_id":"para_1031"},{"text":"38","paragraph_id":"para_1032"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_1033"},{"text":"personally and professionally. Before forming Guieb Inc.,","paragraph_id":"para_1034"},{"text":"Robert leased space to perform automotive work, specifically","paragraph_id":"para_1035"},{"text":"exhaust systems. Roland, at the time, worked in a restaurant.","paragraph_id":"para_1036"},{"text":"As Robert’s business flourished, he asked Roland if he wanted to","paragraph_id":"para_1037"},{"text":"join him and grow the business.","paragraph_id":"para_1038"},{"text":"Our holding does not rule out unique situations that may","paragraph_id":"para_1039"},{"text":"create a fiduciary duty between relatives. “Special","paragraph_id":"para_1040"},{"text":"circumstances” may give rise to a fiduciary duty, and include","paragraph_id":"para_1041"},{"text":"the degree of kinship between the parties, the disparity in age,","paragraph_id":"para_1042"},{"text":"education, and business experience, and the extent to which one","paragraph_id":"para_1043"},{"text":"party placed trust and confidence in the other. See Autotech","paragraph_id":"para_1044"},{"text":"Tech. Ltd. P’ship v. Automationdirect.com, 471 F.3d 745, 749","paragraph_id":"para_1045"},{"text":"(7th Cir. 2006). We identified similar factors in Kam Oi Lee.","paragraph_id":"para_1046"},{"text":"47 Haw. at 140, 552 P.2d at 638 (“health, age, education and","paragraph_id":"para_1047"},{"text":"dominance” may lead a court to find that confidential","paragraph_id":"para_1048"},{"text":"relationship exists).","paragraph_id":"para_1049"},{"text":"Even if we considered those features, Roland and Robert’s","paragraph_id":"para_1050"},{"text":"brotherly relationship does not approach the level of","paragraph_id":"para_1051"},{"text":"confidence and trust that would impose a separate fiduciary duty","paragraph_id":"para_1052"},{"text":"on Robert.","paragraph_id":"para_1053"},{"text":"We decline to impose special fiduciary duties on siblings","paragraph_id":"para_1054"},{"text":"simply because they are siblings who do business together. We","paragraph_id":"para_1055"},{"text":"affirm the circuit court’s July 16, 2020 order granting Robert’s","paragraph_id":"para_1056"},{"text":"MPSJ with respect to count 4.","paragraph_id":"para_1057"},{"text":"39","paragraph_id":"para_1058"},{"text":"*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***","paragraph_id":"para_1059"},{"text":"III.","paragraph_id":"para_1060"},{"text":"We affirm in part the ICA’s September 6, 2024 Judgment on","paragraph_id":"para_1061"},{"text":"Appeal and remand count 12 to the circuit court for further","paragraph_id":"para_1062"},{"text":"proceedings consistent with this opinion. We reverse in part","paragraph_id":"para_1063"},{"text":"the ICA’s judgment and affirm the circuit court’s July 16, 2020","paragraph_id":"para_1064"},{"text":"order granting Robert’s MPSJ with respect to count 4.","paragraph_id":"para_1065"},{"text":"John D. Ferry III /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald","paragraph_id":"para_1066"},{"text":"(Bruce D. Voss and Michael C.","paragraph_id":"para_1067"},{"text":"Carroll on the briefs) /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna","paragraph_id":"para_1068"},{"text":"for petitioners","paragraph_id":"para_1069"},{"text":"/s/ Todd W. Eddins","paragraph_id":"para_1070"},{"text":"Fred Paul Benco","paragraph_id":"para_1071"},{"text":"for respondent /s/ Lisa M. Ginoza","paragraph_id":"para_1072"},{"text":"/s/ Matthew J. Viola","paragraph_id":"para_1073"},{"text":"40","paragraph_id":"para_1074"}],"word_count":9156,"cites":["147 U.S. 101","91 U.S. 489","471 F.3d 745"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"5dfd54c44c4b5ddc2a5d366df8af59a5200dee28141fd976629d52ea99bca0ec","source_url":"https://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/SCWC-20-0000727.pdf","fetched_at":"2026-10-17T20:04:23.534+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01","verification":{"stored_sha256":"5dfd54c44c4b5ddc2a5d366df8af59a5200dee28141fd976629d52ea99bca0ec","recomputed_sha256":"5dfd54c44c4b5ddc2a5d366df8af59a5200dee28141fd976629d52ea99bca0ec","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-17T20:04:25.968Z"}},"hash":"sha256:199f539f281923842727648327b9eec07e32c9cd5c6793bd99dba2383c83d836","version":"legal-2026-10-17","expires":"2026-10-18T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-17+legal-2026-10-17+2026-10-17T17:42:33","content_hash":"sha256:199f539f281923842727648327b9eec07e32c9cd5c6793bd99dba2383c83d836","revalidate_after":"2026-10-17T21:04:26.133Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/haw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-01032125a1865d8b3e35039cfe07e095","response_hash":"sha256:199f539f281923842727648327b9eec07e32c9cd5c6793bd99dba2383c83d836"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T11:58:55.863Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Ahaw-scwc-20-0000727-2025-07-01&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":48800}}