Survivors of Sandra H. Ching, Deceased v. State, Department of Health
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION *** NO. 23585 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I SURVIVORS OF SANDRA H. CHING, DECEASED, Claimant-Appellant, vs. STATE OF HAWAI#I, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Employer-Appellee, Self-Insured. APPEAL FROM THE LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS APPEALS BOARD (CASE NO. AB 96-440) (By: SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy JJ.) The claimants-appellants Survivors of Sandra H. Ching, deceased (the Survivors ), appeal from the June 16, 2000 decision and order of the Labor and Industrial Relations Appeals Board (LIRAB), reversing the decision of the Director of Labor and Industrial Relations (the Director ), dated July 2, 1996, which, inter alia, ordered the employer-appellee State of Hawai#i, Department of Health (the DOH ), to reimburse the Survivors as follows: (1) the sum of $23,695.69, because the DOH was allegedly credited twice for the foregoing amount as reimbursement of its workers compensation lien on third-party settlement proceeds, pursuant to Hawai#i Revised Statutes (HRS) ยง 386-8 (1993); and (2) the sum of $2,423.11 for unpaid out-ofpocket medical expenses owed to the Survivors. On appeal, the Survivors contend that the LIRAB erred in failing to rule as *** NOT FOR PUBLICATION *** follows: (1) that, as a matter of law, the DOH bore the burden of proof, including the burden of producing evidence and the burden of persuasion; (2) that the Survivors are entitled to reimbursement of medical expenses paid by the Survivors in the amount of $2,423.11; and (3) that the Survivors are entitled to reimbursement in the amount of $23,695.69 for mistaken double payment of the DOH s workers compensation lien on third-party settlement proceeds. In response, the DOH argues (1) that, based on the record on appeal, the findings of fact (FOFs) issued by the LIRAB in the June 16, 2000 decision and order were not clearly erroneous, and (2) that the LIRAB s conclusions of law (COLs) were correct. Upon carefully reviewing the record and the briefs submitted by the parties and having given due consideration to the arguments advanced and the issues raised, we affirm the LIRAB s June 16, 2000 decision and order. The Survivors have not shown that their substantial rights . . . have been prejudiced by the LIRAB s FOFs or COLs. Flor v. Holguin, 94 Hawai#i 70, 76, 9 P.3d 382, 388 (2000). In particular, in light of the record, including the testimony adduced at the hearing before the LIRAB, the FOFs were not clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record, and the COLs did not violate constitutional or statutory provisions, did not exceed the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the agency, and were not affected by other error of law. 2 Id. Therefore, *** NOT FOR PUBLICATION *** IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the LIRAB s June 16, 2000 decision and order is affirmed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 18, 2004. On the briefs: Stephen T. Hioki, for the claimant-appellant Survivors of Sandra H. Ching, deceased Kathleen N.A. Watanabe, Deputy Attorney General (DAG), and Steve K. Miyasaka, DAG for employer-appellee State of Hawai#i, Department of Health, self-insured 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
