In Liberty Bank v. Honolulu Providoring, Inc., 65 Haw. 273, 650 P.2d 576 (Haw. 1982), the Supreme Court of Hawaii found that the parties had made "an agreement establishing the time for reasonable notification of the disposition of the collateral." Id. at 580. In finding that reasonable notice had not been given, the court reasoned that they "need not determine whether the notice given was reasonable under the general statutory provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code. By the very terms of the note and security agreement, Liberty Bank failed to provide sufficient notice of the auction within a reasonable time . . . ." Id.