between the same parties or their privies concerning the same subject matter, and precludes the relitigation, not only of the claims which were actually litigated in the first action, but also of all grounds of claim which may have been properly litigated in the first action but were not litigated or decided. 71 Haw. at 463, 795 P.2d at 278 (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). Because the instant appeal does not arise out of a "new action" the doctrine of res judicata does not apply. See Robinson, 65 Haw. at 652, 658 P.2d at 296-97; Cain .2d 845 (1967). 7 . Similarly, we have occasionally overruled our analyses of certain rules of court although the language of the rules has remained unchanged. See, e.g., State v. Young, 73 Haw. 217, 220-22, 830 P.2d 512, 514-15 (1992) (<HOLDING>); State v. Balauro, 73 Haw. 70, 71, 828 P.2d
holding that in order for a waiver of counsel to be valid the trial court must ensure that the defendants waiver of his right to counsel is done knowingly and intelligently so that the record establishes that the defendants choice is made with eyes open holding waiver of right to counsel not voluntary and knowing when defendant terminated counsel and requested another attorney but the trial court would allow delay and appointment only upon waiver of speedy trial right holding that when the defendant is not present in person or by an attorney at trial he does not waive the right to a twelvemember jury where the case is tried by six jurors the sufficiency of the waiver is determined by whether the waiver was knowing and intelligent holding that pursuant to hrpp rule 5 the waiver of the right to jury trial must be either in writing signed by the defendant or in open court from the mouth of the defendant and overruling state v olivera 53 haw 551 497 p2d 1360 1972 to the extent that it countenanced waiver by trial counsel holding that the right to support is not subject to waiver by either parent