Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Reports of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

  Download original PDF

Hisaiah v Hawaiian Flour Mills [1980] TTLawRp 9; 8 TTR 137 (3 October 1980)

8 TTR 137

ANDREW HISAIAH, Defendant-Appellant

v.

HAWAIIAN FLOUR MILLS, Plaintiff-Appellee

Civil Appeal No. 304

Appellate Division of the High Court

Marshall Islands District

October 3, 1980

Appeal from a judgment of the trial court awarded on an account alleged to be due and owing. The Appellate Division of the High Court, Gianotti, Associate Justice, held that there was sufficient evidence to support the judgment, and that there was no abuse of discretion in trial court's denial of defendant's motion for joinder of third party, and therefore judgment was affirmed.

1. Appeal and Error-Evidence-Weight

The Appellate Court cannot reweigh evidence presented to the trial court upon which the judgment is based.

2. Appeal and Error-Evidence-Weight

Where there was sufficient evidence to support the judgment, Appellate Court would not reweigh the evidence on appeal.

3. Civil Procedure-Joinder

Whether a joinder is to be allowed is a matter resting within the sound discretion of the trial court. (Rules of Civil Proc. 14(a), 19 (a))

4. Civil Procedure-Joinder

There was no abuse of discretion in trial court's denial of defendant's motion for joinder of third party, where the court did not "close the door" on defendant's right to bring suit against the third party but only disallowed a joinder at a late date in the present action.

Before BURNETT, Chief Justice, NAKAMURA, Associate Justice, and GIANOTTI, Associate Justice

GIANOTTI, Associate Justice

This appeal rises from a judgment of the trial court awarded on an account alleged to be due and owing by appellant to appellee. In 1976 appellant placed an order with appellee for the purchase of certain "goods" to be delivered in Majuro, Marshall Islands. Upon shipment of the goods and arrival in Majuro, appellant apparently entered into certain negotiations for finance with the Bank of America, Majuro; however, the final outcome was that the goods were never picked up by appellant and subsequently this action arose.