SHANGHAI INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., a Hawai`i corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. ALTEKA CO., LTD., a Japan corporation, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee
ALTEKA CO., LTD., a Japan corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, Cross-Appellee, v. WINDWARD PARK, INC., a Hawai`i corporation, THOMAS ENOMOTO, Defendants-Appellees, Cross-Appellants, and JOHN DOES 1-10, DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10, DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10, Defendants
Appellant Alteka Co., Ltd.'s motion for revision and/or clarification of opinion filed on January 21, 2000 is granted.
The opinion is amended as follows (deletions are bracketed and additions are underscored): 1. Page 3, second full paragraph should read:
"For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the trial court did not err in: (1) allowing Windward's third counterclaim; (2) denying Alteka's motion for JNOV on the issue of jury verdict inconsistency; (3) denying Windward's motion for JNOV on the issue of the enforceability of the amendment; (4) denying fraud
damages to Alteka; (5) allowing Enomoto's testimony; [(6) denying Alteka's request for attorneys' fees and costs;] and (6) granting Alteka's stay on appeal."
2. Page 3-4, last paragraph beginning on page 3 and ending on page 4 should read:
"We hold, however, that the trial court erred in (1) awarding Windward $5 million in damages against Alteka inasmuch as Windward did not adduce evidence at trial that the $5 million bore a reasonable relationship to its actual loss; and (2) denying Alteka's request for attorneys' fees and costs incurred in successfully defending against the claims made by Shanghai. We therefore vacate the $5 million damage award to Windward and remand to the trial court with instructions to (1) enter judgment in favor of Alteka for $1,171,949.76 plus interest and (2) determine and award reasonable attorneys' fees to Alteka against Windward and Shanghai in accordance with this opinion. In all other respects, we affirm. (1)"
3. page 47, first paragraph should read:
"We held, in section III.B., supra, that notwithstanding Alteka's breach of the original agreement, Windward was not entitled to the $5 million damage award against Alteka inasmuch as Windward did not adduce evidence at trial that the $5 million bore a reasonable relationship to its actual loss. Accordingly, because Alteka (1) prevailed on its claim to the deposit against Windward and (2) successfully defended against Shanghai's specific performance/breach claim, it is, on balance, the prevailing party on the issues in the case. Accordingly, Alteka is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees against Windward and Shanghai in an amount to be determined by the trial court on remand."
4. page 53, first paragraph should read:
"Based on the foregoing, we hold that the trial court did not err in: (1) allowing Windward's third counterclaim; (2) denying Alteka's motion for JNOV on the issue of jury verdict inconsistency; (3) denying Windward's motion for JNOV on the issue of the enforceability of the amendment; (4) denying fraud damages to Alteka; (5) allowing Enomoto's testimony; [(6) denying Alteka's request for attorneys' fees and costs;] and (6) granting Alteka's stay on appeal."
5. page 53-54, second paragraph beginning on page 53 and ending on page 54 should read:
"We hold, however, that the trial court erred in (1) awarding Windward $5 million in damages against Alteka; and (2) denying Alteka's request for attorneys' fees and costs incurred in successfully defending against the claims made by Shanghai. Although Windward had a full and fair opportunity at trial to adduce evidence that the $5 million bore a reasonable relationship to its actual loss, it failed to do so. We therefore vacate the $5 million damage award to Windward and remand to the trial court with instructions to (1) enter judgment in favor of Alteka for $1,171,949.76 plus interest and (2) determine and award reasonable attorneys' fees to Alteka against Windward and Shanghai in accordance with this opinion. In all other respects, we affirm."
The Clerk of the Court is directed to incorporate the foregoing changes in the original opinion.
1. As discussed below, the trial court in its May 12, 1997 amended final judgment, awarded Alteka Co. Ltd. $1,171,949.76 plus interest in the amount of $69,080.51 in Civil No. 95-3483-09, and awarded Windward Park, Inc. $5,000,000.00 in Civil No. 95-3483-09. It thereby entered a net judgment in the amount of $3,758,969.73, plus post-judgment interest at the rate of 10% per annum until the judgment is satisfied, in favor of Windward Park, Inc. and against Alteka Co., Ltd.