Wright v. Gronna

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
06-JUN-2025
07:49 AM
Dkt. 59 SO

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I

GEORGE H. WRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
RICHARD D. GRONNA, as Personal Representative of
THE ESTATE OF ROBERT MCCORMICK BROWNE,
Defendant/Cross-claim Defendant-Appellee,
TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF BERNICE PAUAHI BISHOP
dba KAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLS, Defendants/Cross-claimants/
Third-Party Plaintiffs/Cross-claim Defendants-Appellants,
ST. FRANCIS MEDICAL CENTER, a Hawaii corporation,
Defendant/Cross-claim Defendant/Cross-claimant-Appellee,
ST. FRANCIS HEALTHCARE SYSTEM OF HAWAII, a Hawaii corporation,
Defendant/Third-Party Defendant-Appellee,
and
DOES 1-10, JOHN DOES 1-10, DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10, DOE
PARTNERSHIPS 1-10, and DOE NON-PROFIT ENTITIES 1-10,
Defendants/Cross-claim Defendants/Third-Party Defendants

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
(CASE NO. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Hiraoka, Presiding Judge, McCullen and Guidry, JJ.)

This appeal arises out of the Circuit Court of the

First Circuit's1 (circuit court) dismissal of Defendants/Cross-

claimants/Third-Party Plaintiffs/Cross-claim Defendants-

1 The Honorable Gary W.B. Chang presided.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Appellants Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop, dba

Kamehameha Schools' (Kamehameha Schools) cross-claims and third-

party claims as to Plaintiff-Appellee George H. Wright (Wright),

against Defendant/Cross-claim Defendant/Cross-claimant-Appellee

St. Francis Medical Center, and Defendant/Third-Party Defendant-

Appellee St. Francis Healthcare System of Hawaii.2 The circuit

court dismissed the cross-claims and third-party claims after

certifying a good faith settlement between Wright and St.

Francis in 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX.

Kamehameha Schools appealed from two orders related to

certifying the good faith of the settlement: (1) the "Order

Granting Defendant St. Francis Medical Center's Petition for

Determination of Good Faith Settlement" (Good Faith Order),

filed on November 14, 2022; and (2) the "Order Granting

Defendant/Third-Party Defendant St. Francis Healthcare System of

Hawaii's Substantive Joinder to Defendant St. Francis Medical

Center's Petition for Determination of Good Faith Settlement,

Filed August 3, 2022, Filed on August 12, 2022 [Dkt. 241]"

(Joinder Order), filed on October 24, 2022.

2 St. Francis Medical Center and St. Francis Healthcare System of
Hawaii are separate entities, and they are represented by separate counsel in
this litigation. They are referenced individually as St. Francis Medical
Center and St. Francis Healthcare System, and collectively as St. Francis in
this Summary Disposition Order.
2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

I. BACKGROUND

In 2020, Wright filed a Complaint3 against

Defendant/Cross-claim Defendant-Appellee Richard D. Gronna, as

Personal Representative of the Estate of Robert McCormick Browne

(Estate of Dr. Browne),4 Kamehameha Schools, and St. Francis

Medical Center, pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 657-

1.8 (2016 & Supp. 2018). Wright identified Dr. Browne, formerly

employed as Chief of Psychiatry at St. Francis Medical Center,

as having sexually abused him when he was a student at

Kamehameha Schools. HRS § 657-1.8 permits certain actions "for

recovery of damages based on physical, psychological, or other

injury or condition suffered by a minor arising from the sexual

abuse of the minor by any person" that would otherwise be time-

barred.

Wright's Complaint and Amended Complaint asserted

claims of 1) gross professional medical negligence, 2) sexual

assault and battery, 3) breach of fiduciary duty, 4) gross

negligence, 5) intentional infliction of emotional distress, 6)

grossly negligent infliction of emotional distress, and 7)

grossly negligent or reckless referral, selection, training,

3 Wright subsequently filed a First Amended Complaint in March 2022
to include St. Francis Healthcare System as a Defendant, and to allege claims
of intentional fraudulent transfer, constructive fraudulent transfer, and
piercing the corporate veil against St. Francis.

4 Dr. Browne is deceased, and the Estate of Dr. Browne is a nominal
appellee in this appeal.

3
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

retention, and/or supervision of Dr. Browne against Kamehameha

Schools.

Kamehameha Schools filed cross-claims5 against St.

Francis Medical Center and the Estate of Dr. Browne, and a

third-party complaint against St. Francis Healthcare System.

Wright entered into a settlement agreement with

St. Francis in July 2022. In August 2022, St. Francis Medical

Center filed a Petition for Determination of Good Faith

Settlement (Petition). St. Francis Healthcare System joined

St. Francis Medical Center's Petition, requesting that the

circuit court "find and order that the settlement was made and

entered into in good faith" and dismiss " any and all claims

against the settling parties by any joint tortfeasors or co-

obligors." Kamehameha Schools opposed the Petition to the

extent it sought dismissal of the cross-claims and third-party

claims against St. Francis. Kamehameha Schools did not object

to a finding that the settlement was made in good faith.

The circuit court granted the Petition and St. Francis

Healthcare Systems' joinder, entering its Joinder Order in

October 2022 and its Good Faith Order in November 2022.

5 Kamehameha Schools filed its initial cross-claims on June 15,
2020. The cross-claims were subsequently amended on July 31, 2020 to include
more extensive factual allegations and allege additional claims of
intentional fraudulent transfer, constructive fraudulent transfer, and
piercing the corporate veil against St. Francis Medical Center.

4
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Kamehameha Schools timely appealed both orders, and the appeal

was docketed as CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX.6

II. POINT OF ERROR

Kamehameha Schools raises a single point of error on

appeal, contending that the circuit court erred in concluding

that the good faith settlement bars all of Kamehameha Schools'

cross-claims and third-party claims under HRS § 663-15.5 (2016).

We review the circuit court's conclusions of law de

novo, under the right/wrong standard. State v. Hoshijo ex rel.

White, 102 Hawaiʻi 307, 316, 76 P.3d 550, 559 (2003). Upon

careful review of the record and relevant legal authorities, and

having given due consideration to the arguments advanced and the

issues raised by the parties, we resolve Kamehameha Schools'

contention as follows.

HRS § 663-15.5, entitled "Release; joint tortfeasors;

co-obligors; good faith settlement" provides, in pertinent part,

(d) A determination by the court that a settlement
was made in good faith shall:
(1) Bar any other joint tortfeasor . . . from any
further claims against the settling tortfeasor
. . . except those based on a written indemnity
agreement; and
(2) Result in a dismissal of all cross-claims filed
against the settling joint tortfeasor . . .
except those based on a written indemnity
agreement.

6 On August 10, 2023, this court filed an Order for Temporary
Remand, instructing the circuit court to amend the Good Faith Order and
Joinder Order to reflect "a determination of good faith as to the settlement
by and between Wright, [St. Francis Medical Center], and [St. Francis
Healthcare System]," or to explain why that was "not possible or appropriate
to do so." On remand, the circuit court entered an Amended Good Faith Order
and Amended Joinder Order, reflecting that the settlement was made in good
faith between Wright and both St. Francis entities.
5
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

St. Francis Medical Center argues that the "plain

language of the statute reflects the legislative intent to

preclude not only contribution claims, but also 'any' other

claims that might seek recovery against the settling party for

the plaintiff's harm, whether such claims are styled as seeking

'indemnity,' [']subrogation,' 'contribution,' or anything else."

The argument is contrary to the language of the statute and the

legislative history.

HRS § 663-15.5 (Supp. 2001) originally provided:

(d) A determination by the court that a settlement was
made in good faith shall bar any other joint tortfeasor
. . . from any further claims against the settling
tortfeasor . . . for equitable comparative contribution, or
partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative
negligence or comparative fault.

(Emphasis added.) For purposes of the statute, joint

tortfeasors are "persons jointly or severally liable in tort for

the same injury to person or property." HRS § 663-11 (2016).

The claim bar applied only to claims for joint tortfeasor

indemnity or contribution.

The legislature amended the statute in 2003. The

phrase emphasized above was deleted and the words "except those

based on a written indemnity agreement" were added.

Subparagraph (2) was also added. 2003 Haw. Sess. Laws Act 146,

§ 1 at 344. The claim bar language substitution did not change

its substance because a written indemnity agreement is not an

equitable remedy. The House Judiciary Committee reported "this
6
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

measure is primarily a housekeeping measure." H. Stand. Comm.

Rep. No. 712, in 2003 House Journal, at 1378. The Senate

Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee similarly reported that

the "purpose of this measure is to make clarifying and

housekeeping amendments." S. Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 1205, in

2003 Senate Journal, at 1538. The Conference Committee reported

the "purpose of this measure is to make clarifying and

housekeeping amendments" to "[m]ake technical, nonsubstantive

amendments for clarity and consistency in style and language."

Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 9, in 2003 House Journal, at 1703, 2003

Senate Journal, at 949. Thus, the claim bar still applies only

to claims for joint tortfeasor indemnity or contribution.

Contrary to Kamehameha Schools' contention, the

circuit court did not authorize a "sweeping dismissal" of all

claims – including those grounded on independent duties owed to

Kamehameha Schools – against St. Francis. The circuit court's

Amended Good Faith Order stated,

IT IS HEREBY, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that St.
Francis Medical Center's Petition for Determination of Good
Faith Settlement, filed August 3, 2022, is hereby GRANTED
as follows:

. . . .

2. The cross-claims against St. Francis Medical
Center are here by [sic] dismissed pursuant to HRS [§] 663-
15.5(d)(2).

3. St. Francis Medical Center is discharged from all
liability for contribution to any other joint tortfeasor or
co-obligor.

4. Pursuant to HRS § 663-15.5(d)(1), this Order bars
any other joint tortfeasor or co-obligor from bringing any
7
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

further claims against St. Francis Medical Center in
connection with this litigation, except those based upon a
written indemnity agreement.

The circuit court's Amended Joinder Order stated, with regard to

the third-party complaint against St. Francis Healthcare System,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that:

. . . .

2. Defendant/Third-Party Defendant Healthcare
System's Substantive Joinder to Defendant St. Francis
Medical Center’s Petition for Determination of Good Faith
Settlement, Filed August 3, 2022, filed on August 12, 2022,
is GRANTED as to all cross-claims and third-party claims
pursuant to [HRS §] 663-15.5(d)(2).

As this court recently recognized in Abad v. Griffith,

Reading all parts of HRS § 663-15.5 together, we
conclude the trial court's approval of a good faith
settlement under HRS § 663-15.5(d)(2) requires dismissal of
only those crossclaims against a settling joint tortfeasor
raised in the capacity of a joint tortfeasor, i.e., those
seeking contribution or indemnity (directly or indirectly)
for the injury (to the complainant) that is the subject of
the good faith settlement.

[W]e examine, for this limited purpose, the nature of
the [appellants'] claims against the [settling joint
tortfeasors], i.e., to consider whether they seek
contribution or indemnity for the original injury to
[appellees], as opposed to relief for alleged direct
injuries to the [appellants].

Abad v. Griffith, Nos. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, 2024 WL

5088457, at *5 (Haw. App. Dec. 12, 2024) (SDO).

In Abad, this court examined the nature of the

appellants' claims, including the nature of the relief

requested, and concluded that the appellants made "separate,

unqualified requests for attorneys' fees and costs that are not

tied to the [appellants'] liability to the [appellees]." Id.

Here, Kamehameha Schools' cross-claims and third-party claims,

8
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

including its breach of contract and Uyemura v. Wick7 claims,

arose out of the "original injury" to Wright caused by Dr.

Browne's abuse, and are "directly or indirectly" in the nature

of contribution and indemnity claims.

The circuit court's dismissal "as to all cross-claims

and third-party claims" is therefore consistent with the

underlying purpose of HRS § 663-15.5 of protecting settling

tortfeasors from contribution claims brought by nonsettling

alleged joint tortfeasors.

III. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the circuit court's Good

Faith Order and Joinder Order are affirmed.

DATED Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, June 6, 2025.

On the briefs: /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
Presiding Judge
Paul Alston and
Claire Wong Black, /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
for Defendants/Cross- Associate Judge
claimants/Third-Party
Plaintiffs/Cross-claim /s/ Kimberly T. Guidry
Defendants-Appellants.
Associate Judge
Andrew J. Lautenbach,
for Defendant/Cross-claim
Defendant/Cross-claimant-
Appellee.

David J. Minkin,
for Defendant/Third-Party
Defendant-Appellee.

7 Uyemura v. Wick, 57 Haw. 102, 551 P.2d 171 (1976).

9