as scheduled for trial. On December 15,1992, Vincents filed their Notice of Appeal. On December 17, 1992, the trial court entered its Order denying the November 20, 1992 Motion and Vincents filed the First Amended Notice of Appeal. Trial began as scheduled on December 21, 1992. The December 17, 1992 Order is an appealable collateral order, and we therefore have appellate jurisdiction. Association of Owners of Kukui Plaza v. Swinerton & Walberg Co., 68 Haw. 98, 107, 705 P.2d 28, 35 (1985). II. DISCUSSION A. Vincents assert that the trial court erred in its December 17, 1992 Order. On appeal, we review the denial of the motion to stay proceedings pending arbitration under the de novo standard. Koolau Radiology Inc. v. Queen’s Medical Ctr., 73 Haw. 433, 439-40, 834 P.2d 1294, 1298 (1992) (<HOLDING>). We note that the trial court is statutorily
recognizing de novo standard of review holding that a finding of accommodation is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review instead of under a de novo standard holding that review of the denial of a motion to compel arbitration is under the de novo standard recognizing abuse of discretion rather than de novo standard of review holding that the appellate standard of review of ineffectiveness claim is de novo