Higa v. Mirikitani

*175DISSENTING OPINION OF KOBAYASHI, J., WITH WHOM MARUMOTO, J., JOINS

I dissent.

I am of the opinion that the applicable statute of limitations in the instant case is HRS § 657-12. The opinion of the majority of the court does violence to the generally known and usual meaning of the word “debt”1 to reach the conclusion that HRS § 657-1(1) is applicable. Clearly HRS § 657-7 and HRS § 657-1(1) are not applicable herein.

In a strained, tenuous analysis and construction of HRS § 657-1(1) the majority of the court, in actuality, judicially legislates HRS § 657-1(1) to read “actions based upon a debt,…