Case Study : Kiimaka 's Contract

BLAW 200 Emi Akutsu Assignment 8 – Kiimaka 's Contract Who are the parties in this lawsuit? Occupation, etc. The plaintiff is Island Directory Company, Inc., a Hawaii corporation, and the defendant is Iva 's Kinimaka Enterprises, Inc., a Hawaii corporation, and Iva Kinimaka dba Iva 's Complete Katering What are the facts/situation – what happened? Before publishing its annual Yellow Pages telephone directory, GTE Hawaiian Telephone Company (GTE) contacts all clients who had advertised in its previous year 's directory if they want to revise their advertisements or the status for the following year. Because the catering services of "Iva 's Complete Katering" had been advertised in GTE 's Yellow Pages for the previous five years, Iva, the …show more content…

What led to this lawsuit? Originally, Iva refused to pay the advertisement fee to Plaintiff claiming the contract was unintended, and Plaintiff entered into the lawsuit. After the trial judged in favor of Plaintiff, Iva appealed to the appellate court alleging the contract was made by misleading of Plaintiff 's sales representative. If someone asked you where to find this case, what could you tell them? What reporter(s) is it in? I could tell them to see the citation on the top left-hand side of the first page. We can find this case in Volume 10 of the official Hawaii Appellate Court Reports, on page 15. The parallel citation is IN Volume 859 of the Pacific Reporter, Second Series, on page 935. This case is in both Hawaii Appellate Court Reporters and Pacific Reporter. What did the trial court do? Who won and lost? What did the trial court say? The trial court judged in favor of Plaintiff, thus, Plaintiff won and Defendant lost. The question of fact was if a contract existed between the parties. The trial court decided that the contract existed, even Ivan was against it, if he had read through Application for Advertising, he would have realized that he was signing contract. What did the appellate court rule? Did it agree with the trial court (affirm) or disagree (reverse)? The appellate court reversed the rule by the trial court concluding that Plaintiff fraudulently induced Iva