Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · Hawaii · Chapter 635

§635-3 Dismissal for want of prosecution.

370 words·~2 min read·/hi/chapter-635/635-3

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

§635-3 Dismissal for want of prosecution. The court may dismiss any action for want of prosecution after due notice to the claimants whenever claimants have failed to bring such action to trial within a period established by rule of court. Prior to dismissal of any action for want of prosecution, a court shall have adopted, promulgated, and published a rule or rules of court providing circumstances in which a claimant may seek relief from the judgment or order and such other safeguards as may be necessary. [CC 1859, §1162; RL 1925, §2391; RL 1935, §4106; am L 1937, c 117, §1; am L 1939, c 145, §1; am L Sp 1941, c 56, §1; RL 1945, §10104; RL 1955, §231-4; HRS §635-3; am L 1972, c 89, §2B(a)]
Rules of Court
Dismissal, see HRCP rule 41(b).
Law Journals and Reviews
Remedies to obtain dismissal for want of prosecution discussed. 3 HBJ, no. 3, at 2 (1965).
Case Notes
Defendant's joining in stipulation to remove a cause from trial calendar is action of the "defendant to delay or postpone trial". 45 H. 165, 363 P.2d 968 (1961).
Question as to continued effectiveness of section in view of HRCP 41(b) raised but not decided. 45 H. 165, 363 P.2d 968 (1961).
Matter of continuance in view of public climate is within court's discretion. 45 H. 478, 370 P.2d 739 (1962).
Application of six-year provision. 48 H. 152, 397 P.2d 593 (1964); 48 H. 290, 401 P.2d 449 (1965); 48 H. 303, 401 P.2d 456 (1965).
Factors to be considered in the exercise of the discretion to dismiss. 60 H. 125, 588 P.2d 416 (1978).
Cases prior to adoption of the Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure.
Notice of motion, how made. 1 H. 14 (1847).
Rules for postponement of trial laid down. 1 H. 74 (1852).
Granting or refusing continuance at discretion of court. 7 H. 211 (1888); 8 H. 466 (1892); 14 H. 313 (1902); 29 H. 434 (1926); 33 H. 113 (1934); 34 H. 390 (1937).
Affidavit in support of continuance because of absence of witness should set out facts the witness is expected to prove. 8 H. 466 (1892).
Cited: 24 H. 97, 107 (1917); 33 H. 432, 439 (1935).
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.