Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 217 Draft 01 2024-2026COUNTY OF HAWAF1 RESOLUTION NO. STATE OF HAWAM 21: 25 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INDEMNIFICATION OF FORMER EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY WHO ARE NAMED AS INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS IN THE LAWSUIT KNOWN AS JOSEPHINE T. W. BISHOP, ET AL. V. COUNTY OFHAWAPI ET AL. AGAINST ALL DAMAGES ASSESSED THEREIN AND MAKING OTHER FINDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2-188 OF THE HAWAPI COUNTY CODE. WHEREAS, on April 6, 2023, Plaintiffs JOSEPHINE T. W. BISHOP and NELSON HINANO KAHELE (hereinafter "Plaintiffs") commenced a civil action against Defendants COUNTY OF HAWAI`I (hereinafter "the County"), JUSTIN GASPAR (hereinafter "Gaspar"), and CHAD TANIYAMA (hereinafter "Taniyama" ), known as Josephine T. W. Bishop, et al. v. County of Hawai `i, et al., Civil No. 3CCV-23-0000134 (hereinafter "the Lawsuit"); and WHEREAS, Gaspar and Taniyama, both of whom were formerly employed by the Hawaii County Police Department, are named in their individual capacities as Defendants in the Lawsuit (collectively hereinafter "the Individual Defendants"); and WHEREAS, on April 6, 2023, Plaintiffs filed the Complaint for Damages in the Lawsuit, attached hereto as Exhibit A (hereinafter "the Complaint"), alleging, among other things, claims against the County and the Individual Defendants for wrongful death, negligence and assault and battery; and WHEREAS, on or around April 21, 2023, the County's Police Commission, in accordance with the Hawaii Revised Statutes, Sections 52D-8 and 52D-9, determined that the Individual Defendants were acting in the performance of their duties as police officers when the allegations contained in the Complaint allegedly occurred; and WHEREAS, Section 2-188(a) of the Hawaii County Code (hereinafter "the Code") requires the adoption of a resolution by the Council in order to effectuate the joint defense of the County and the Individual Defendants in the Lawsuit, including but not limited to the payment of all claims, whether by settlement or judgment; and WHEREAS, representation of the Individual Defendants by the Corporation Counsel and her authorized representatives is not an admission of liability; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAI`I that, -in accordance with Section 2-188(a) of the Code, this body finds that: 1. Any acts or failures to act by the Individual Defendants, as alleged in the Complaint, were done within the course and scope of the Individual Defendants' employment as employees of the County; 2. Any acts or failures to act by the Individual Defendants, as alleged in the Complaint,were done in good faith, without actual malice,to serve the County, and in the apparent best interests of the County; 3. Payment of the claims or judgment of the Lawsuit would be in the best interests of the County; and 4. It is in the public interest to indemnify the Individual Defendants for all damages that may be assessed in the Lawsuit, including punitive damages, so that the Corporation Counsel and her authorized representatives may represent the Individual Defendants. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that,pursuant to the findings hereinabove made, the County is authorized to indemnify, defend, and represent the Individual Defendants against all damages assessed in the Lawsuit, including but not limited to the payment of all claims, whether by settlement or judgment. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the County Clerk shall transmit copies of this resolution to Renee N. C. Schoen, Corporation Counsel, and Diane T. Nakagawa,Director of Finance. Dated at Hilo , Hawai`i, this 9th day of July , 2025 . INTRODUCED B -CO 1.tr_ COUNCIL . /I:ER, CO TY OF HAWAI`I COUNTY COUNCIL ROLL CALL VOTE County of Hawai`i AYES NOES ABS EX Hilo, Hawai`i GALIMBA X HUSTACE X I hereby certify that the foregoing RESOLUTION was by INABA X the vote indicated to the right hereof adopted by the COUNCIL of the KAGIWADA X County of Hawai`i on July 9, 2025 KANEALII-KLEINFELDER X KIERKIEWICZ X ATTEST: KIMBALL X ONISHI X VILLEGAS X 9 0 0 0 Reference: C. 338/FC-70 M� r- COUNTY CLERK CHAIRPERSON&PRESIDING OFFICER RESOLUTION NO. �' 2 ERIC A. SEITZ ATTORNEY AT LAW A LAW CORPORATION ERIC A. SEITZ 1412 DELLA A. BELATTI 7945 JONATHAN M.F. LOO 10874 KEVIN A. YOLKEN 10987 820 Mililani Street, Suite 502 Honolulu, HI 96813 Tel. (808) 533-7434 E-mail(s): eseitzatty@yahoo.com daubelatti@yahoo.com jloo33138@yahoo.com kevinyolken@gmail.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs JOSEPHINE T.W. BISHOP and NELSON HINANO KAHELE Electronically Filed THIRD CIRCUIT 3CCV-23-0000134 06-APR-2023 01:55 PM Dkt. 1 CMPS IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT JOSEPHINE T.W. BISHOP and NELSON HINANO KAHELE, Plaintiffs ►A COUNTY OF HAWAII, JUSTIN GASPAR, CHAD TANIYAMA, and DOE DEFENDANTS 1-10, Defendants. STATE OF HAWAII CIVIL NO. (Other Civil Action) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; SUMMONS COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Plaintiffs JOSEPHINE T.W. BISHOP and NELSON HINANO KAHELE ("Plaintiffs"), by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby allege as follows: EXHIBIT A (9 pages) Pg1 INTRODUCTION This action arises from the fatal shooting of the Plaintiffs' son, Kainoa Hinano Kahele- Bishop ("Kainoa7% by Hawaii County Police Department ("HPD") officers. 2. On March 10, 2023, HPD officers allegedly identified and pursued a vehicle in which Kainoa was riding (hereinafter the "Vehicle") as matching the description of a vehicle that had been reported stolen several days earlier. 3. The HPD officers pursued the Vehicle until it stopped at which point the officers immediately opened fire and shot into the Vehicle without any justification for doing so. 4. Plaintiffs are informed and allege that the Officer Defendants' use of deadly force was unnecessary, unwarranted, and in violation of applicable policies and practices of HPD and laws of the State of Hawaii, inter alia. PARTIES 5. Plaintiffs are the natural parents of the decedent, Kainoa Hinano Kahele-Bishop, and bring this suit for wrongful death as permitted by Hawaii Revised Statutes ("HRS") Section 663-3, inter alia. Plaintiffs reserve their right to bring additional claims in a representative capacity for the estate of the decedent when duly appointed as such, and to bring any and all claims permitted on behalf of additional family members. 6. Plaintiffs and Kainoa are and/or have been residents of the County of Hawaii, State of Hawaii, at all times pertinent hereto. 7. Defendant COUNTY OF HAWAII (hereinafter "County") is a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the.laws of the State of Hawaii as a political subdivision thereof, and Defendant County is sued herein for the actions and/or omissions of one or more of its officers, officials, employees, and/or departments, including the HPD. Pg2 8. Defendants JUSTIN GASPAR ("Defendant Gaspar") and CHAD TANIYAMA ("Defendant Taniyama") are and have been residents of the County of Hawaii and police officers employed by the Hawaii County Police Department at all times pertinent hereto. Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama are sued herein both in their individual and official capacities. 9. DOE DEFENDANTS 1-10 (hereinafter "Doe Defendants") are associates, officers, employees, agents, and/or representatives of the named Defendants, and/or the Doe Defendants may have contributed to or may be responsible for the injuries and damages alleged herein. Doe Defendants are sued herein under fictitious names for the reason that their true names and identities are presently unknown to Plaintiffs and their attorneys despite due diligence. The true names and capacities of the Doe Defendants will be substituted as they become known. The Doe Defendants are sued herein both in their individual and official capacities. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 10. Jurisidction and venue are proper in this Court pursuant to HRS Section 603- 21.5(a)(3) and HRS Section 603-36(5), inter alia, since all of the acts, omissions, and occurrences alleged herein took place within the County of Hawaii, State of Hawaii. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that on the evening of March 10, 2023, Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama were on duty in Kailua-Kona searching for a suspect in an attempted murder case named Ronald Kahihikolo ("Kahihikolo"). 12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that in searching for Kahihikolo Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama received information that Kainoa and Kahihikolo were seen together, in separate vehicles. 13. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that in their search for 3 y IL Kahihikolo Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama observed Kainoa in a Vehicle with Jacqueline Keanaaina ("Keanaaina"), and pursued that Vehicle which eventually came to a stop. 14. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that when the Vehicle stopped, Keanaaina got out and attempted to flee while Kainoa remained seated in the Vehicle. 15. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that although Kainoa did not attempt to flee and posed no threat to the officers, Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama immediately fired several shots into the Vehicle striking and killing Kainoa. 16. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama violated HPD policies pertaining to the standards for use of forces when they discharged their firearms thereby directly, proximately, and foreseeably causing the death of Kainoa as alleged herein. 17. Since Kainoa's death Defendants Gaspar, Taniyama, and certain of the Doe Defendants have harassed Plaintiffs' family members and repeatedly have made false, misleading, and/or threatening statements about the relevant events to support the narrative that the shooting of Kainoa was justified. 18. Plaintiffs are informed. and believe, and thereupon allege, that Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama violated HPD policies and applicable national use of force standards when they resorted to deadly force without justification and without employing any conflict de-escalation or intervention techniques. 19. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama were not provided with adequate training in conflict de-escalation tactics. 20. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama were not provided with adequate training in apprehending a suspect in a vehicle. 0 re. y J 21. Defendant County has ratified and approved of the acts and omissions of Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama alleged herein by failing and refusing to initiate any investigation, disciplinary, or corrective actions arising from the shooting death of Kainoa 22. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing actions and/or inaction, Plaintiffs have incurred costs and expenses in amounts to be proven at trial. 23. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing Plaintiffs and the members of Plaintiff's extended family have suffered great mental anguish, suffering, pain, loss of affection, and anger as a result of the police killing of Kainoa. COUNT (Wrongful Death — HRS § 663-3) 24. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 23, above. 25. At all times pertinent hereto Defendants Gaspar, Taniyama, and the Doe Defendants were acting herein within the course and scope of their employment with HPD in behalf of Defendant County of Hawaii. 26. Kainoa's death was a direct and proximate result of the Defendants' negligent acts, omissions, nonfeasance, malfeasance, failure to train, and/or failure to take the necessary and appropriate actions to prevent the death of Kainoa as described herein. 27. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts, Kainoa suffered severe mental anguish, pain, fear, loss of earning capacity, loss of enjoyment of life, and ultimately death. 28. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts, Plaintiffs have been deprived of the life-long care, affection, and companionship of their son and will continue to be so deprived for the remainder of their lives. 29. Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the wrongful death of Kainoa, and Defendant County is liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior, inter alia. 5 Pg5 COUNT H (Negligence) 30. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 23, above. 31. Defendants' conduct as alleged herein was at a minimum negligent or grossly negligent and was a substantial factor in causing the wrongful death of Kainoa. 32. The Defendants have a duty of reasonable care to prevent harm or injury to others which includes using appropriate tactics, giving appropriate commands, giving warnings, not using force unless necessary and justified, using less than lethal options, avoiding creating unreasonable risks, abiding by HPD policies and local and national use of force standards, and only using deadly force as a last resort. 33. Defendants breached their duty of care owed to Kainoa by acting and/or failing to act as alleged herein. 34. Defendants' actions and/or failures to act were a substantial factor in causing the damages alleged herein, including the death of Kainoa. 35. The negligent and/or reckless actions and omissions of Defendants include, but are not limited to: a. Defendant County's failure to -properly and adequately train police officers, in conflict de-escalation and intervention techniques; b. the Officer Defendants' failure to follow HPD policy by stopping and apprehending a suspect without waiting for uniformed officers to arrive; c. the failure to exercise reasonable care by using excessive force to apprehend Kinoa; d. the failure of Officer Defendants to exercise the procedures in which they were trained with respect to apprehending an individual in a vehicle without creating a danger to themselves and without the use of deadly force; 2 36. Defendants failed to use care that a reasonable person would use to avoid injury to Kainoa, and Kainoa's death was the foreseeable consequence of the Officer Defendants' unjustified resort to using deadly force. 37. The negligent acts and omissions as described herein of each Defendant were a substantial cause in the death of Kainoa, thus Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the damages alleged herein. 38. Defendant County is vicariously liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior. COUNT III (Assault and Battery) 39. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate' the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 23, above. 40. The conduct of Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama as alleged herein constituted the torts of assault and battery, and caused the death of Kainoa. 41. Defendants Gaspar and Taniyama acted herein knowingly, deliberately, intentionally, and maliciously, when they unlawfully resorted to the use of excessive and deadly force without justification, shooting Kainoa and causing his death. WHEREFORE Plaintiffs pray for relief as follows: a. That judgment be entered in Plaintiffs' favor on each count of the Complaint; b. That Plaintiffs be awarded general and special damages against Defendants in amounts to be proven at trial; c. That Plaintiffs be awarded punitive damages against Defendants Gaspar, Taniyama, and certain of the Doe defendants in their individual capacities; d. For reimbursement of Plaintiffs' costs and expenses herein, including reasonable provision for attorneys' fees as permitted by law; e. For an award of pre and post judgment interest; 7 Pg7 f. For such further and additional relief as the Court deems appropriate and just. DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii. April 6, 2023. /s/ Eric A. Seitz ERIC A. SEITZ DELLA A. BELATTI JONATHAN M.F. LOO KEVIN A. YOLKEN Attorneys for Plaintiffs JOSEPHINE T.W. BISHOP and NELSON HINANO KAHELE 0 .0 STATE OF HAWA19 SUMMONS CASE NUMBER CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT TO ANSWER CIVIL COMPLAINT PLAINTIFF VS. DEFENDANT(S) JOSEPHINE T.W. BISHOP and NELSON HINANO KAHELE COUNTY OF HAWAII, JUSTIN GASPAR, CHAD TANIYAMA, and DOE DEFENDANTS 1-10 PLAINTIFFS NAME &ADDRESS, TEL. NO. JOSEPHINE T.W. BISHOP and NELSON HINANO KAHELE C/O ERIC A. SEITZ 820 MILILANI STREET, SUITE 502 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813 (808)533 T434 TO THE ABOVE -NAMED DEFENDANT(S) You are hereby summoned and required to file with the court and serve upon ERIC A. SEITZ plaintiffs attorney, whose address is stated above, an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within 20 days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the data of service. If you fall to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded In the complaint. THIS SUMMONS SHALL NOT BE PERSONALLY DELIVERED BETWEEN 10:00 P.M. AND 6:00 A.M. ON PREMISES NOT OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, UNLESS A JUDGE OF THE ABOVE -ENTITLED COURT PERMITS, IN WRITING ON THIS SUMMONS, PERSONAL DELIVERY DURING THOSE HOURS. A FAILURE TO OBEY THIS SUMMONS MAY RESULT IN AN ENTRY OF DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST THE DISOBEYING PERSON OR PARTY. The original document is filed in the Judiciary's electronic case management Effective Date of 28-0Oct2019 Signed Cheryl 10 system which is accessible via eCourt Kokua uk�A at: http:1www.courts.state.hi.us rd it Clerk, 3rd Circuit, State of Hawaii to of In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and other applicable state and federal laws, if you require a reasonable accommodation for a disability, please contact the ADA Coordinator at the Circuit Court Administration Office on HAWAII- Phone No. 808-961-7424, TTY 808-961-7422, FAX 808-961-7411, at least ten (10) working days prior to your hearing or appointment date. Form 1C-P-787 (3CCr) (10/19) Summons to Complaint ®RtG-AC-508 (10/19) p g