Samson v.

Nahulu SCWC-10-102

The Civil Lawsuit

Not everything that happens in court involves
crimes.
Courts also resolve disputes between
individuals.
Civil Lawsuits.
Contracts
Property
Torts

Who is Involved
Plaintiff The person who initiates the lawsuit.
Defendant The person against whom the
lawsuit is brought.
The Judge The person who presides over the
court, decides any questions of law that might
arise, and rules on any motions that either the
plaintiff or defendant bring up.
The Jury The people who consider the evidence
and decide whether or not the plaintiff has
proved everything that they need to prove.
In a bench trial, the judge performs this function.

The Process

The Complaint
The Answer
Discovery
Trial
Appeals

The Hawaii Courts

Appeals
The Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) may
overturn decisions of lower courts, and the
Supreme Court may overturn decisions of the
ICA.
Only a final decision by the court may be
appealed.
Most appeals allege errors of law in the lower
court, not errors of fact.
The ICA must hear all cases appealed from lower
courts, but the Supreme Court chooses whether
or not to hear each case appealed from the ICA.

Legal Questions
You can think of a lawsuit as a way that we
answer questions that people are fighting
about.
The big question is (almost) always simple:
Does the Defendant have to pay the Plaintiff
money?
But we have to answer lots of other questions
to get there.

Legal Questions
Two main kinds of questions have to be
answered during cases:
Questions of law.
Questions of fact.

Legal Questions
Questions of Fact
Who, what, when, where, why, how.
Basically, questions of fact covers all of the
questions about the things that happened
that have lead to the lawsuit.

Legal Questions
Questions of Law
These questions arent about what happened.
They are questions about what the law
actually is
And questions about how the law applies to
the facts in this case.

Legal Questions
The law isnt always written down in one
place.
Common law.
Even when it is written down, sometimes it
isnt clear how it applies.
No vehicles in the park.
Is a tricycle a vehicle?

Legal Questions
Appeals usually focus on questions of law.
Trial courts hear the witnesses, and see the
evidence, so they are better at judging facts.
Appeals courts look at the record of the case
from the lower court, so they are in a better to
see mistakes that the lower court made.
When a higher court rules on a question of
law, lower courts must follow that decision in
future cases.

Samson v. Nahulu
This is a tort lawsuit.
The case started on July 4, 2005 when Nahulu
hit Minor with her car.
Parents (The Samsons) sued in 2008.
In 2010, a jury ruled for Nahulu
Samsons appealed.
On March 31, 2014, the ICA affirmed the trial
court.

Samson v. Nahulu
The Samsons petitioned the Hawaii Supreme
Court for a Writ of Certiorari.
The Supreme Court granted the petition, and
will hear the case.
What will the Supreme Court be looking for?

Samson v. Nahulu: Facts

No dispute:
Nahulu hit Minor with her car.
Nahulus car was moving.
Minor was crossing the street.
Farrington Highway, two lanes.
Stopped cars in first lane.

Samson v. Nahulu: Facts

Disputed:
How fast was Nahulu driving?
Was Minor in the crosswalk when she was hit by
the car?

Samson v. Nahulu
What does Nahulu get if the Supreme Court
rules in her favor?
Remember, no appeal from Supreme Court.
What do Samsons get if the Supreme Court
rules in their favor?

Samson v. Nahulu
There are many complex issues in this appeal.
The Supreme Court may only want to talk
about some of these issues when the case is
argued.
We are going to look at a couple of the issues,
but theres no guarantee that they will be the
same ones the court decides to explore during
oral argument.

Allegations in Samson v. Nahulu

(1) The ICA gravely erred by affirming the trial
courts decision to allow a certain jury instruction
because, the Samsons argued, the instruction
misstated the law by giving the erroneous
impression that a pedestrian who fails to adhere
to traffic rules forfeits any right to recovery from
a negligent driver;
(2) The ICA gravely erred by concluding any error
by the trial court in excluding the testimony
concerning Nahulus speed was harmless;

Allegations in Samson v. Nahulu

(3) The ICA gravely erred by affirming the trial
courts ruling to exclude the use of the
photographic diagram of the accident location,
indicating Minor was in a crosswalk when Nahulu
struck her;
(4) The ICA gravely erred by concluding that a
particular jury instruction did not misstate the
law and, because the Samsons failed to show
defects in the instruction had a detrimental effect
on their case, the use of the instruction by the
trial court did not require reversal.

Samson v. Nahulu
We are going to focus on two issues:
(1) The jury instruction.
(2) Harmless error.

Samson v. Nahulu
Jury instructions are important because they
explain the law to the jury.
(Remember, the jury has to figure out more
than just the facts.)
If the judge gives the jury bad instructions, the
jury might not apply the law properly.

Samson v. Nahulu
Heres one of the jury instructions:
A person traveling on the highway has a right to
assume that all other persons using the highway
will obey the law and that one is not bound to
keep a lookout for others who violated the law,
applies only to those cases where the automobile
is being driven in conformity to the law and not in
violation thereof, and it has no application where
the automobile is being driven in a negligent
manner.

State v. Arena
Heres a quote from the case that provided the jury
instruction:
The rule that a person traveling upon a highway has a right
to assume that all other persons using the highway will
obey the law and that one is not bound to keep a lookout
for others who may violate the law applies only to those
cases where the automobile is being driven in conformity
to the law and not in violation thereof, and it has no
application where the automobile is being driven in a
negligent manner, where it is not properly equipped with
lights, or where it is being driven at an excessive rate of
speed. In those instances the primary negligence of the
driver of the automobile renders inoperative the rule
stated.

State v. Arena: Facts

In this case, a car was pulling out of a
driveway in front of stopped cars.
A second car was passing the stopped cars.
The second car hit the first car, killing driver of
first car.
Criminal prosecution.
Court said that negligence of driver of second
car doesnt mean that driver of first car was
not negligent.

State v. Arena
Question of law: do the differences matter?
ICA agreed that the judge should have
included the first part of the quote.
But said that the mistake didnt hurt the
Plaintiffs chances of winning.
So ICA said that this was not reversible error.

Witness Testimony
One of the witnesses would have testified that
Nahulu was travelling at an unsafe speed.
The trial court did not let the witness use that
language, because the trial judge thought it
was closer to a statement of law than a
statement of fact.
ICA said that the trial judge should have let
the witness say unsafe, but the error was
harmless.

Witness Testimony
ICA said exclusion was harmless error because
there was other evidence presented to the
jury that Nahulu was driving at an unsafe
speed.
Skid marks, different language (travelling at a
good speed).

Harmless Error

Efficiency is an important part of justice.

Lawsuits are not cheap.
They take lots of time.
Do you want to redo trials for any little
mistake, or just for important mistakes?

Harmless error = no new trial.

Kekua v. Kaiser Found. Hosp.

Courts have consistently held that the
improper exclusion of competent testimony
constitutes harmless error where essentially
the same evidence is established by the
testimony of other witnesses or by other
means.
Important phrase: essentially the same
evidence.

Kekua v. Kaiser: Facts

Medical malpractice death case.
Doctor at clinic said patient should be
admitted to hospital.
Hospital sent patient home.
Patient dies that night from illness.

Kekua v. Kaiser: Facts

Defendant said that doctor at clinic had given
patient an injection that concealed symptoms,
so it wasnt negligent to send patient home.
Court did not let nurse testify that parents
told her that clinic doctor gave patient a shot.
But court did let another doctor testify that
parents told him the same thing.
So Supreme Court said harmless error.

Using Cases
Courts like to be consistent with the things
they have done in the past.
So if they are convinced that the past case is
like this case, they are more likely to decide
the case the same way.

Using Cases
If the case came out the way that helps your
client, you want to focus on why the cases are
similar.
If the case came out the way that doesnt help
your client, you want to focus on the
differences.

Any Questions?