Lexplug logoLexplug

Fukida v. Hon/Hawaii Service and Repair

Hawaii Supreme Court
97 Haw. 47, 33 P.3d 543 (Haw.Ct.App.2001) (2001)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

Damages for the loss of use of personal property are intended to compensate for the inconvenience and economic loss suffered during the deprivation and are not capped by the market value of the property itself.


Facts:

  • In May 1996, Jerry Fukida took his vehicle to a repair shop operated by the defendants for a new transmission.
  • Fukida authorized the work for an estimated $2,100-$2,250 but conditioned his authorization on being able to review the receipt and inspect the part before installation.
  • The defendants' shop installed the transmission without fulfilling Fukida's pre-conditions.
  • The shop then presented Fukida with a bill for $2,478.95.
  • When Fukida refused to pay because his conditions were not met, the shop asserted a lien and refused to return his vehicle.
  • The defendants wrongfully retained possession of Fukida's vehicle for over two years, from June 2, 1996, to August 29, 1998.

Procedural Posture:

  • Jerry Fukida filed a complaint against Hon/Hawaii Service and Repair in the district court of the first circuit seeking the return of his vehicle and special damages.
  • The defendants filed a counterclaim for the cost of repairs and storage fees.
  • Following a bench trial, the district court found the defendants' lien was unlawful, dismissed their counterclaim, and awarded Fukida $6,970 in loss of use damages.
  • The defendants, as appellants, appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA).
  • The ICA initially vacated the judgment, but after a grant of certiorari, the Supreme Court of Hawai'i remanded the case back to the ICA.
  • On remand, the ICA held that loss of use damages cannot, as a matter of law, exceed the value of the property and remanded to the district court to cap Fukida's award at the vehicle's value.
  • Fukida, as petitioner, filed a second application for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Hawai'i, which the court granted to review the ICA's decision on capping damages.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Do damages awarded for the tortious deprivation of the use of personal property ('loss of use' damages) have a legal cap equal to the value of the property?


Opinions:

Majority - Levinson, J.

No, damages for loss of use of property are not capped by the value of the property itself. The purpose of awarding loss-of-use damages is to provide reasonable compensation for the inconvenience or monetary loss suffered, which is an injury different in kind from property damage. The court reasoned that an arbitrary cap based on property value fails to make the plaintiff whole, as the inconvenience of losing the use of one's property is not related to its market value. Citing modern jurisprudence, the court noted that whether a person drives a new Rolls Royce or an old Chevy Nova, the inconvenience of losing transportation for a period of time is comparable. The proper limitation on such damages is the reasonableness of the time period for which compensation is sought—the time necessary to repair, replace, or recover the property—not the value of the property itself.



Analysis:

This decision rejects an antiquated rule and establishes in Hawai'i the modern legal principle that loss of use damages are a distinct category of harm separate from the value of the property. It aligns Hawai'i with a growing number of jurisdictions that focus on compensating the plaintiff for the actual inconvenience suffered. The ruling's significance is that it prevents wrongdoers from benefiting from a low-value property cap, especially in cases of prolonged wrongful retention where damages for inconvenience can substantially exceed the property's worth. Future litigation in this area will now focus on the reasonableness of the duration of the loss of use rather than arguing over the property's market value as a ceiling for damages.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Fukida v. Hon/Hawaii Service and Repair (2001) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Fukida v. Hon/Hawaii Service and Repair