Campbell v. Hipawai Corporation

639 P.2d 1119 (1982)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Campbell v. Hipawai Corporation

Hawaii Appellate Court
639 P.2d 1119 (1982)

Facts

There were three adjoining plots of land in Oahu, Hawaii. The center parcel, parcel 15, was bordered to the west by parcel 14 and to the east by parcel four. Ownership of parcel 15 was in dispute. Campbell (plaintiff) owned parcel four and claimed ownership of parcel 15 by right of a royal land grant by King Kamehameha III in 1853. The Hipawai Corporation (defendant) owned parcel 14 and claimed ownership of parcel 15 by adverse possession established by its predecessors in interest. Hipawai’s claim to parcel 15 by adverse possession rested on a long history of parcel 15 being cultivated along with parcel 14 by Hipawai’s predecessors. Parcel 15 was first cultivated as part of parcel 14 in 1918 and continued to be cultivated and conveyed with parcel 14 between numerous subsequent owners for decades. Hipawai’s immediate predecessor, Leon Chun, acquired parcel 14 and parcel 15 by deed in 1957. Campbell’s predecessor on parcel four, Alice Campbell, had begun to reside on parcel four in 1936 and had never questioned the use and cultivation of parcel 15 by the owners of parcel 14. When Chun acquired the parcels, he discussed the disputed tax status of parcel 15 with Alice, without any resolution. In 1958 Chun tore down a fence that had appeared between parcel 14 and parcel 15 and continued to use parcel 15 as he had before. In 1967 Campbell inherited parcel four from Alice and began living there. Chun initiated a discussion with Campbell about the disputed tax status of parcel 15, but no resolution was reached. In 1968 Chun conveyed the property he owned to Hipawai. In 1977 Chun discovered that Campbell was clearing underbrush on the disputed parcel and had re-erected the fence between the parcels. Chun again tore the fence down. Campbell sued Hipawai to quiet title. The trial court instructed the jury that adverse possession was governed by a 20-year time requirement under Hawaii statute. The court quieted title in Campbell’s favor. Hipawai appealed, alleging that the time requirement for its adverse possession claim should have been 10 years, not 20.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership