| |
| | Hawaii Supreme Court Case No. 22091 (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15) |
 | | For the purpose of this rule, "improve" or "improved" means to increase the award for a plaintiff or to decrease the award for the defendant. |
 | | Schweizer argued that he was the "prevailing party" in the trial under HAR Rule 25(A)(1) because he had secured a 30% reduction in the arbitration award (4) and, as the prevailing party, was entitled to trial costs pursuant to HAR Rule 25(B). |
 | | Molinar contended that, by including the prejudgment interest, she would be the prevailing party under HAR Rule 25(A) because her total trial award of $55,054.09 would not represent a reduction of 30% of the original $66,644.48 arbitration award, and that, therefore, she, not Schweizer, was entitled to costs. |
| www.hsba.org /hsba/Legal_Research/Hawaii/sc/22091.cfm (4394 words) |
|