Watanabe v. Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop DBA Kamehameha Schools
154 Haw. 294
Haw. App.2024Background
- The case arises from claims of childhood sexual abuse by Dr. Robert Browne, a psychiatrist affiliated with St. Francis Medical Center, with most plaintiffs being referred to him by Kamehameha Schools.
- Thirty-two plaintiffs sued Kamehameha Schools, St. Francis Medical Center, the Estate of Dr. Browne, and others for sexual assault, gross negligence, and related torts.
- Kamehameha Schools settled all claims with the plaintiffs for $80 million, seeking to bar contribution or indemnity claims from other joint tortfeasors under Hawaii’s good faith settlement statute (HRS § 663-15.5).
- The circuit court approved the settlement as made in good faith, thus barring cross-claims by St. Francis against Kamehameha Schools, over St. Francis’s objection.
- St. Francis appealed the order, arguing the settlement was not in good faith, violated public policy, and improperly impaired its rights as a non-settling joint tortfeasor due to lack of disclosure regarding allocation and claim assignments.
- The Intermediate Court of Appeals vacated the approval of the settlement, finding the agreement lacked sufficiently definite terms and due process for St. Francis, and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff’s Argument | Defendant’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the $80 million settlement a good faith settlement under HRS § 663-15.5? | Kamehameha Schools: Settlement was arm’s length, supported by policy, and aimed at resolution. | St. Francis: Lacked allocation specifics, potentially injurious, not good faith. | Not good faith; lacked definite terms, remanded. |
| Did the settlement violate due process for St. Francis? | Kamehameha Schools: Proper process followed with court approval. | St. Francis: Could not assess or contest settlement due to missing details. | Yes; St. Francis denied due process. |
| Was there impermissible assignment of personal tort claims? | Kamehameha Schools: Asserted right to subrogation based on case law (Alamida). | St. Francis: Tort claims not assignable; settlement purports improper assignment. | Unclear from record; remanded for clarification. |
| Did the settlement terms allow Kamehameha Schools to pursue impermissible claims against St. Francis? | Kamehameha Schools: Terms allow only permissible subrogation and contribution claims. | St. Francis: Retained claims potentially violate statutory bars. | Insufficient evidence to approve; details needed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Troyer v. Adams, 102 Hawai‘i 399 (good faith settlement determination governed by totality of the circumstances)
- Brooks v. Dana Nance & Co., 113 Hawai‘i 406 (factors courts consider in assessing good faith of a settlement)
- Sprague v. California Pac. Bankers & Ins. Ltd., 102 Hawai‘i 189 (personal tort claims generally non-assignable)
- Alamida v. Wilson, 53 Haw. 398 (equitable subrogation in certain circumstances)
- Provident Funding Assocs., L.P. v. Gardner, 149 Hawai‘i 288 (to be enforceable, contracts must be certain and definite as to essential terms)