 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Catron v. Tokio Marine Management Inc.6/2/1999
Plaintiff-appellant Robert Catron appeals the order and judgment of the circuit court granting summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee Tokio Marine and Fire Insurance Company, Ltd. on all counts related to allegations of bad faith handling of his workers' compensation claim. Because our opinions in Best Place, Inc. v. Penn. America Ins. Co., 82 Hawaii 120, 920 P.2d 334 (1996) and Hough v. Pacific Insurance Company, 83 Hawaii 457, 927 P.2d 858 (1996), decided subsequent to the circuit court's grant of summary judgment, are controlling, we vacate the order and judgment and remand for further proceedings.
I. BACKGROUND
On January 6, 1993, Catron suffered a work-related injury while employed by Pan-Pacific Construction, Inc. At the time of the incident, Tokio Marine was the workers' compensation carrier for Pan-Pacific. Catron filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits relating to this injury.
On September 16, 1994, Catron and Tokio Marine, for and on behalf of Pan-Pacific, entered into a settlement and release agreement under which Catron agreed to release his claims arising out of his work-related injury under Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 386. This agreement was approved by the Director of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations on April 5, 1995. Catron alleges that, subsequent to the execution of the settlement agreement, Tokio Marine delayed payments due. Moreover, Catron alleges that he received a large number of harassing telephone calls, both before and after the execution of the settlement agreement. Specifically, he states that "I logged about 87 calls at the request of the Honolulu Police Department. In these calls someone would breath heavily or laugh or remain silent for several seconds and then hang up." In October 1994, Catron claims that the Honolulu Police Department placed a "phone trap" on his line and determined that the harassing calls were originating from the offices of Tokio Marine.
On May 11, 1995, Catron filed a twelve-count complaint in the instant case in which he alleged, inter alia, a cause of action against Tokio Marine for (1) malicious breach of contract and/or breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (2) negligence; (3) reckless or negligent supervision or hiring of employees; and (4) negligent and/or intentional infliction of emotional distress. On August 10, 1995, Tokio Marine filed three separate motions for summary judgment on the grounds that (1) the circuit court lacked jurisdiction over all counts in the complaint because the original jurisdiction provision of the workers' compensation statute barred the court from hearing the causes of action alleged therein; (2) the settlement agreement barred all of Catron's claims; and (3) there was no recognized cause of action in Hawaii for breach of an implied covenant of good faith.
On October 9, 1995, the circuit court granted Tokio Marine's motion for summary judgment on the issue of breach of an implied covenant of good faith, but denied it insofar as the cause of action was also plead as a malicious breach of contract claim. A hearing on Tokio Marine's remaining motions for summary judgment was held on November 2 and 9, 1995. After hearing, the circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of Tokio Marine on the basis that Catron's claims were barred by the original jurisdiction provision of HRS Chapter 386. Tokio Marine's motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the settlement agreement barred Catron's claims was denied as moot because of the court's ruling on the jurisdiction issue. A written order denying Tokio Marine's motion for summary judgment on settlement grounds was filed on December 11, 1995. For rea
Page 1 2 3 4 Hawaii Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|