NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 12-NOV-2025 07:51 AM Dkt. 65 SO
NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I
THE WAHIAWA CENTER FOR COMMUNITY HEALTH dba WAHIAWA HEALTH, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HAWAII COALITION FOR HEALTH, RAFAEL DEL CASTILLO, ARLEEN JOUXSON-MEYERS, ARLEEN MEYERS, M.D., INC, CARVER WILCOX, BEVERLY WILCOX, ELLEN SOFIO, and AMY DABIS, Defendants-Appellees; and WILLIAM F. MCKENZIE, WILLIAM F. MCKENZIE, M.D., INC., MARILYN LADAO, LYNDSEY LADAO, and KYLE LADAO, Defendants-Appellants; and JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10; DOE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES 1-10; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10 and DOE ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CASE NO. 1CC181001775)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, Wadsworth and Guidry, JJ.)
Defendants-Appellants William F. McKenzie and William
F. McKenzie, M.D., Inc. (together Dr. McKenzie), Marilyn Ladao, NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Lyndsey Ladao, and Kyle Ladao (collectively, the Ladaos) 1 appeal
from the Circuit Court of the First Circuit's 2 (circuit court)
December 23, 2022 "Judgment Pursuant to the Order (1) Granting
Plaintiff[-Appellee The Wahiawa Center for Community Health dba
Wahiawa Health's (Wahiawa Health)] Motion to Confirm Arbitration
Award and (2) Denying [the Appellants'] Motion to Vacate
Arbitration Award" (Judgment). 3
This appeal arises out of legal action initiated by
Wahiawa Health against the Appellants. Wahiawa Health purchased
Dr. McKenzie's medical practice in 2017. Dr. McKenzie and the
Ladaos, who had worked for Dr. McKenzie, entered into employment
agreements with Wahiawa Health. The Appellants subsequently
terminated their employment with Wahiawa Health, and Dr.
McKenzie resumed a private practice. Wahiawa Health's Complaint
alleged that the Appellants were unlawfully competing with
Wahiawa Health and in breach of contractual and other duties.
The Appellants moved to dismiss the Complaint on the
ground that arbitration was required. The circuit court stayed
the circuit court proceedings pending completion of arbitration
1 Defendants-Appellants are collectively referred to as the Appellants herein.
2 The Honorable Dean E. Ochiai presided.
3 The circuit court entered an "Amended Judgment Pursuant to the Order (1) Granting [Wahiawa Health's] Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award and (2) Denying [the Appellants'] Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award and Decision and Final Award of Arbitrator, Dated October 15, 2021", on February 1, 2023.
2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
proceedings. The circuit court granted Wahiawa Health's motion
to confirm the Arbitration Award, and dismissed as moot the
Appellants' motions to vacate the Arbitration Award and dismiss
the Complaint.
The Appellants raise three points of error on appeal,
contending that the circuit court erred in granting Wahiawa
Health's motion to confirm the Arbitration Award, and disposing
of the underlying Complaint against the Ladaos: (1) "insofar as
there was no agreement to arbitrate with the Ladao[s]"; (2)
"without more carefully rendering specific findings of fact
[(FOFs)] and conclusions of law [(COLs)]"; and (3) "insofar as
the Arbitrator refused to consider evidence material to the
controversy with respect to the questions submitted to the
Arbitrator." (Formatting altered.)
Upon careful review of the record, briefs, and
relevant legal authorities, and having given due consideration
to the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties,
we resolve the Appellants' points of error as discussed below
and affirm the circuit court's Judgment.
(1) The Appellants assert that the circuit court erred
in confirming the Arbitration Award, "insofar as the [Ladaos]
were not parties to the agreement to arbitrate." (Formatting
altered.)
3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
The Appellants' points of error do not specify where
in the record the Appellants objected to this alleged error, or
the manner in which this error was brought to the attention of
the circuit court. See Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule
28(b)(4). This court is not obligated to sift through the
record for information that should have been provided by the
Appellants. See Haw. Ventures, LLC v. Otaka, Inc., 114 Hawaiʻi
438, 480, 164 P.3d 696, 738 (2007).
Based on the court's independent review of the record,
it appears the Appellants did not object to the Ladaos' alleged
lack of an agreement to arbitrate until three months after the
circuit court ruled on the Appellants' motion to vacate and
Wahiawa Health's motion to confirm the Arbitration Award, and
while entry of an order was pending. Given that the Appellants
waived their objection to the arbitration, we conclude that the
circuit court did not err in confirming the Arbitration Award.
See Hawaii Revised Statutes § 658A-23(a)(5) (2016) ("Upon motion
to the court by a party to an arbitration proceeding, the court
shall vacate an award made in the arbitration proceeding if
. . . [t]here was no agreement to arbitrate, unless the person
participated in the arbitration proceeding without raising the
objection under section 658A-15(c) not later than the beginning
of the arbitration hearing[.]").
4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
(2) The Appellants assert that the circuit court erred
by not "more carefully rendering specific [FOFs] and [COLs]" in
confirming the Arbitration Award and disposing of the claims
against them in the underlying Complaint. (Formatting altered.)
"[W]henever material facts are in dispute in determining whether
an arbitration award should be vacated, the circuit court should
conduct an evidentiary hearing and render [FOFs] and [COLs] in
support of granting or denying the motion to vacate the
arbitration award." Clawson v. Habilitat, Inc., 71 Haw. 76, 79,
783 P.2d 1230, 1232 (1989).
The Appellants fail to identify material facts in
dispute that would require an evidentiary hearing and specific
FOFs and COLs by the circuit court. Although the Appellants
argue that the Ladaos did not agree to and did not participate
in the arbitration, the Appellants twice moved to dismiss the
Complaint on the basis that the claims were required to be
resolved through arbitration.
Moreover, in moving to vacate the Arbitration Award,
the Appellants argued the Arbitrator was "sloppy," and that the
Arbitrator did not "resolve claims against all of the parties
who were named as defendants in the litigation." Thus, the
Appellants argued that the Arbitrator should have more
specifically resolved claims against all of the Ladaos; they did
not argue that the Ladaos were not subject to the arbitration.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 12-NOV-2025 07:51 AM Dkt. 65 SO
NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I
THE WAHIAWA CENTER FOR COMMUNITY HEALTH dba WAHIAWA HEALTH, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HAWAII COALITION FOR HEALTH, RAFAEL DEL CASTILLO, ARLEEN JOUXSON-MEYERS, ARLEEN MEYERS, M.D., INC, CARVER WILCOX, BEVERLY WILCOX, ELLEN SOFIO, and AMY DABIS, Defendants-Appellees; and WILLIAM F. MCKENZIE, WILLIAM F. MCKENZIE, M.D., INC., MARILYN LADAO, LYNDSEY LADAO, and KYLE LADAO, Defendants-Appellants; and JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10; DOE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES 1-10; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10 and DOE ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CASE NO. 1CC181001775)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, Wadsworth and Guidry, JJ.)
Defendants-Appellants William F. McKenzie and William
F. McKenzie, M.D., Inc. (together Dr. McKenzie), Marilyn Ladao, NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Lyndsey Ladao, and Kyle Ladao (collectively, the Ladaos) 1 appeal
from the Circuit Court of the First Circuit's 2 (circuit court)
December 23, 2022 "Judgment Pursuant to the Order (1) Granting
Plaintiff[-Appellee The Wahiawa Center for Community Health dba
Wahiawa Health's (Wahiawa Health)] Motion to Confirm Arbitration
Award and (2) Denying [the Appellants'] Motion to Vacate
Arbitration Award" (Judgment). 3
This appeal arises out of legal action initiated by
Wahiawa Health against the Appellants. Wahiawa Health purchased
Dr. McKenzie's medical practice in 2017. Dr. McKenzie and the
Ladaos, who had worked for Dr. McKenzie, entered into employment
agreements with Wahiawa Health. The Appellants subsequently
terminated their employment with Wahiawa Health, and Dr.
McKenzie resumed a private practice. Wahiawa Health's Complaint
alleged that the Appellants were unlawfully competing with
Wahiawa Health and in breach of contractual and other duties.
The Appellants moved to dismiss the Complaint on the
ground that arbitration was required. The circuit court stayed
the circuit court proceedings pending completion of arbitration
1 Defendants-Appellants are collectively referred to as the Appellants herein.
2 The Honorable Dean E. Ochiai presided.
3 The circuit court entered an "Amended Judgment Pursuant to the Order (1) Granting [Wahiawa Health's] Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award and (2) Denying [the Appellants'] Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award and Decision and Final Award of Arbitrator, Dated October 15, 2021", on February 1, 2023.
2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
proceedings. The circuit court granted Wahiawa Health's motion
to confirm the Arbitration Award, and dismissed as moot the
Appellants' motions to vacate the Arbitration Award and dismiss
the Complaint.
The Appellants raise three points of error on appeal,
contending that the circuit court erred in granting Wahiawa
Health's motion to confirm the Arbitration Award, and disposing
of the underlying Complaint against the Ladaos: (1) "insofar as
there was no agreement to arbitrate with the Ladao[s]"; (2)
"without more carefully rendering specific findings of fact
[(FOFs)] and conclusions of law [(COLs)]"; and (3) "insofar as
the Arbitrator refused to consider evidence material to the
controversy with respect to the questions submitted to the
Arbitrator." (Formatting altered.)
Upon careful review of the record, briefs, and
relevant legal authorities, and having given due consideration
to the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties,
we resolve the Appellants' points of error as discussed below
and affirm the circuit court's Judgment.
(1) The Appellants assert that the circuit court erred
in confirming the Arbitration Award, "insofar as the [Ladaos]
were not parties to the agreement to arbitrate." (Formatting
altered.)
3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
The Appellants' points of error do not specify where
in the record the Appellants objected to this alleged error, or
the manner in which this error was brought to the attention of
the circuit court. See Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule
28(b)(4). This court is not obligated to sift through the
record for information that should have been provided by the
Appellants. See Haw. Ventures, LLC v. Otaka, Inc., 114 Hawaiʻi
438, 480, 164 P.3d 696, 738 (2007).
Based on the court's independent review of the record,
it appears the Appellants did not object to the Ladaos' alleged
lack of an agreement to arbitrate until three months after the
circuit court ruled on the Appellants' motion to vacate and
Wahiawa Health's motion to confirm the Arbitration Award, and
while entry of an order was pending. Given that the Appellants
waived their objection to the arbitration, we conclude that the
circuit court did not err in confirming the Arbitration Award.
See Hawaii Revised Statutes § 658A-23(a)(5) (2016) ("Upon motion
to the court by a party to an arbitration proceeding, the court
shall vacate an award made in the arbitration proceeding if
. . . [t]here was no agreement to arbitrate, unless the person
participated in the arbitration proceeding without raising the
objection under section 658A-15(c) not later than the beginning
of the arbitration hearing[.]").
4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
(2) The Appellants assert that the circuit court erred
by not "more carefully rendering specific [FOFs] and [COLs]" in
confirming the Arbitration Award and disposing of the claims
against them in the underlying Complaint. (Formatting altered.)
"[W]henever material facts are in dispute in determining whether
an arbitration award should be vacated, the circuit court should
conduct an evidentiary hearing and render [FOFs] and [COLs] in
support of granting or denying the motion to vacate the
arbitration award." Clawson v. Habilitat, Inc., 71 Haw. 76, 79,
783 P.2d 1230, 1232 (1989).
The Appellants fail to identify material facts in
dispute that would require an evidentiary hearing and specific
FOFs and COLs by the circuit court. Although the Appellants
argue that the Ladaos did not agree to and did not participate
in the arbitration, the Appellants twice moved to dismiss the
Complaint on the basis that the claims were required to be
resolved through arbitration.
Moreover, in moving to vacate the Arbitration Award,
the Appellants argued the Arbitrator was "sloppy," and that the
Arbitrator did not "resolve claims against all of the parties
who were named as defendants in the litigation." Thus, the
Appellants argued that the Arbitrator should have more
specifically resolved claims against all of the Ladaos; they did
not argue that the Ladaos were not subject to the arbitration.
5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
The written closing argument submitted by the Appellants to the
Arbitrator identifies the Respondents as including the Ladaos.
On this record, the Appellants fail to establish that
the circuit court erred by entering the April 7, 2022 order
confirming the Arbitration Award and by not rendering more
specific FOFs and COLs.
(3) The Appellants contend that the circuit court
erred in confirming the Arbitration Award "insofar as the
Arbitrator exceeded her authority and refused to consider
evidence material to the controversy," by ignoring evidence that
the Appellants' resignations were accepted by Wahiawa Health
without objection. (Formatting altered.) The Appellants
further contend that the Arbitrator impermissibly credited the
testimony of Wahiawa Health's Chief Executive Officer, and that
there was no competent evidence of losses of income attributable
to the Appellants' resignations and of any attempt by Wahiawa
Health to mitigate its purported losses.
"[I]n reviewing an arbitration award, circuit courts
are powerless to correct an arbitrator's [FOFs] even if [they
are] clearly erroneous, or an arbitrator's rulings of law, even
if [they are] wrong." Nordic PCL Constr., Inc. v. LPIHGC, LLC,
136 Hawaiʻi 29, 42, 358 P.3d 1, 14 (2015) (citations omitted).
"[W]here the parties agree to arbitrate, they thereby assume all
the hazards of the arbitration process, including the risk that
6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
the arbitrators may make mistakes in the application of law and
in their [FOFs]." Haw. State Tchrs. Ass'n v. Dep't of Educ.,
140 Hawaiʻi 381, 391-92, 400 P.3d 582, 592-93 (2017) (citation
omitted).
Having failed to identify specific evidence that the
Arbitrator refused to consider, and having themselves initiated
the arbitration process by moving to dismiss the Complaint, the
Appellants fail to demonstrate any error by the circuit court in
confirming the Arbitration Award.
For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the Judgment.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, November 12, 2025.
On the briefs: /s/ Katherine G. Leonard Presiding Judge Eric A. Seitz, for Defendants-Appellants. /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth Associate Judge Mark S. Kawata, for Plaintiff-Appellee. /s/ Kimberly T. Guidry Associate Judge