Hi Kai Investment v. Aloha Futons Beds & Waterbeds
Hawaii Supreme Court
929 P.2d 88 (1996)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
Aloha Futons Beds & Waterbeds (defendant) leased property from Hi Kai Investment (plaintiff) for a term of 10 years. In the event of a breach by Aloha, the lease required Aloha to pay the total rent for the 10-year term, minus any income from Hi Kai’s subsequent re-renting of the property. After Aloha defaulted on payments, Hi Kai brought a summary possession action, seeking possession of the property, past rent, and damages equal to future rent through the lease expiration date. The district court issued writs of possession in Hi Kai’s favor, and further awarded Hi Kai damages equal to the rent that had accrued before issuance of the writs of possession. The court, however, denied Hi Kai’s request for damages representing future rent payments through the end of the lease term accruing after the date the writs were issued, concluding that Hawai’i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 666 (1993) precludes a landlord from collecting any damages accruing after a writ of possession has been issued. Hi Kai appealed, contending that Chapter 666 does not prohibit a landlord from bringing an action for both possession and damages that might accrue after possession is awarded.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ramil, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.