Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves an appeal by Robert Kelshaw Greenwell and Lou Ellen Lambert against a Circuit Court judgment favoring Frank Russell Greenwell and Carol Adamson Greenwell in a land boundary dispute concerning properties distributed through parental trusts. The dispute centers on whether the boundary should be determined by a survey map or historical ahupua‘a lines. The Circuit Court granted summary judgment and awarded attorneys' fees and costs to the Appellees, which the Appellants contested. The court relied on a 1987 Settlement Agreement that resolved prior litigation and established boundaries based on surveys by Haruo Shigeoka, rejecting the ahupua‘a boundary claim. The appellate court affirmed the Circuit Court's decisions, citing res judicata, as the issues had been settled in the 1987 Agreement. Additionally, the court upheld the award of attorneys' fees under HRS 607-14, considering the claims as in the nature of assumpsit. Thus, the Final Judgment in favor of the Appellees was affirmed, precluding the Appellants from relitigating the boundary issues.
Legal Issues Addressed
Application of Res Judicata in Property Litigationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Appellants' claims were barred by res judicata because the issues regarding property boundaries were settled in the 1987 Settlement Agreement, precluding further litigation.
Reasoning: In the discussion, Appellants' claims against Appellees are barred by res judicata.
Awarding Attorneys' Fees and Costssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court affirmed the trial court's award of attorneys' fees and costs to Appellees, finding the claims to be in the nature of assumpsit under HRS 607-14.
Reasoning: Regarding attorneys' fees, Appellants contended that their claims were for declaratory relief rather than assumpsit...The Circuit Court's award of attorneys' fees to Appellees was affirmed.
Boundary Determination in Property Disputessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirmed that the boundary determination relied on the survey map rather than historical ahupua‘a boundaries, as specified in the 1987 Settlement Agreement.
Reasoning: The 1987 Settlement Agreement clarified that the boundary for distribution to Robert F. Greenwell does not rely on the ahupua‘a line between Honokéhau 1st and 2nd.
Summary Judgment Standardssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court upheld the summary judgment, indicating no genuine issues of material fact existed, supporting judgment as a matter of law in favor of Appellees.
Reasoning: The standards for reviewing summary judgment stipulate that it is to be evaluated de novo, with a ruling appropriate if there are no genuine issues of material fact, supporting the moving party's claim to judgment as a matter of law.