Cox v. Cox.
138 Haw. 476
| Haw. | 2016Background
- Bruce Cox petitioned for appellate attorney’s fees after offering Wife $9,000 in a 2006 HFCR Rule 68 settlement during divorce litigation; Wife rejected.
- Divorce decree awarded Wife $22,223.46 as an equalization payment, differing from Cox’s offer.
- Husband sought post-offer appellate fees under HFCR Rule 68 (2006); family court awarded trial fees, denied appellate fees.
- ICA vacated the August 2012 order and remanded for equitable determination under HRS § 580-47; question framed as whether Rule 68 applies to HRS § 580-47 cases.
- Hawai'i Supreme Court held HFCR Rule 68 does not apply to family court proceedings governed by HRS § 580-47, and remanded for consideration under § 580-47.
- Dissent argues Rule 68 can be interpreted to preserve validity consistent with § 580-47 and criticizes invalidation without rulemaking process.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does HFCR Rule 68 apply to HRS § 580-47 family court cases? | Cox asserts Rule 68 governs appellate fees post-offer. | Rule 68 conflicts with § 580-47 and should not apply to such cases. | Rule 68 does not apply to HRS § 580-47 cases. |
| Does Rule 68 abridge substantive rights under the Hawaii Constitution and HRS § 580-47? | Rule 68 preserves due process and equitable considerations for appeal costs. | Rule 68 improperly narrows discretion and alters the test for fee awards. | Rule 68 abridges substantive rights; governs by § 580-47 instead. |
| Are Rule 68’s post-offer fees capable of coercing settlements in family court? | Rule 68 incentivizes settlement by making fees a potential penalty. | Rule 68 merely encourages settlements with appropriate safeguards. | Rule 68’s coercive effect is a concern; but the dispositive conclusion is its inapplicability under § 580-47. |
| Should the case be remanded for appellate fees under § 580-47 rather than Rule 68? | Equitable factors were already addressed; appellate fees should follow Rule 68. | Appellate fees must be determined under § 580-47’s multi-factor test. | Remand for appellate fees and costs under HRS § 580-47. |
Key Cases Cited
- Nelson v. University of Hawai'i, 99 Hawai'i 262 (2002) (Rule 68 considerations linked to post-offer costs and timing)
- Nakasone v. Nakasone, 102 Hawai'i 177 (2003) (Offers and judgments in family court context; equitable analysis cautions)
- Criss v. Kunisada, 89 Hawai'i 17 (App. 1998) (Item-by-item vs. whole-judgment comparison under Rule 68)
- Owens v. Owens, 104 Hawai'i 292 (App. 2004) (Rule 68 applicability to custody and multi-issue judgments)
- Delta Air Lines v. August, 450 U.S. 346 (1981) (FRCP 68 scope limited to judgments in favor of the plaintiff)