NOT OF PUBLICATION
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
KUBECKOVA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Defendant-Appellee, and
JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10;
DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10; DOE NON-PROFIT ENTITIES 1-10; and
DOE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
(CIV. NO. 00-1-1207)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Burns, C.J., Watanabe and Lim, JJ.)
After a meticulous review of the record and the briefs submitted by the parties, and giving careful consideration to the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties, we conclude:
(1) The jury
instructions at issue on appeal were "supported or warranted by the
evidence adduced at trial." Loevsky
v. Carter, 70 Haw. 419, 433, 773 P.2d 1120,
1128-29 (1989) (citing Gelber
v. Sheraton-Hawaii Corp., 49 Haw. 327,
417 P.2d 638 (1966); Tanuvasa v. City & County, 2 Haw. App. 102, 626 P.2d 1175 (1981)).
(2) The jury's verdict was supported by substantial evidence adduced at trial, and was not "against the manifest weight of the evidence." Stallworth v. Boren, 99 Hawai`i 287, 307, 54 P.3d 923, 943 (App. 2002) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the January 21, 2003 judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai`i, May 18, 2005.
On the briefs:
Ian L. Mattoch and
Mark F. Gallagher
(Law Offices of Ian L. Mattoch),