Gillan v. Government Employees Insurance Co.

Concurring Opinion of

ACOBA, J.

I concur in the result reached by the majority,1 but on the grounds that (1) the interpretation of a statute such as HRS § 431:10C-308.5(b)2 is a question of law, and, *124hence, this court is competent to perform that task without reference to an agency’s interpretation of the subject statute, (2) if the term IME in HRS § 431:10C-308.5(b) is ambiguous with respect to “record reviews,” as the majority holds, (3) resort must be had to legislative history to define that term, (4) because the legislative history categorizes record reviews as an “ancillary procedure…