CHAPTER 662
485 words·~2 min read·
/hi/chapter-662/662A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
CHAPTER 662
STATE TORT LIABILITY ACT
Section
662-1 Definitions
662-2 Waiver and liability of State
662-3 Jurisdiction
662-4 Statute of limitations
662-5 Jury
662-6 Pleadings, trial and appeal
662-7 Attorney general
662-8 Interest
662-9 Costs
662-10 Judgment as bar
662-11 Compromise
662-12 Attorney's fees
662-13 No awards except upon legal evidence
662-14 Exclusiveness of remedy
662-15 Exceptions
662-16 Defense of state employees; county lifeguards
662-16.5 Defense of professionally licensed or certified state
employees; decision not to defend
662-17 Benefits and obligations of parents of minor
employees
662-18 Conclusive presumptions; unexploded ordnance on
Kaho`olawe and in the ocean adjacent to Kaho`olawe
662-19 Limited liability for skateboarding activities in
public skateboard parks
Cross References
Government entity as a tortfeasor; abolition of joint and several liability, see §663-10.5.
Law Journals and Reviews
Tort and Insurance "Reform" in a Common Law Court. 14 UH L. Rev. 55 (1992).
Ala Loop and the Private Right of Action Under Hawai‘i Constitution Article XI, Section 9: Charting a Path Toward a Cohesive Enforcement Scheme. 33 UH L. Rev. 367 (2010).
Case Notes
Where plaintiff was arrested seven years after issuance of "retake warrant" for parole violation, neither the State nor the parole office could be vicariously liable for false imprisonment or false arrest because the State Tort Liability Act does not waive immunity for these claims. Additionally, plaintiff could not overcome qualified immunity of parole officer because she was unable to show that parole officer was motivated by malice towards her. 37 F.4th 527 (2022).
Determination of whether a state function is discretionary, discussed. 71 H. 581, 799 P.2d 959 (1990).
Counties do not fall within the ambit of the State Tort Liability Act; §46-72 is the statute of limitations applicable to actions against the counties. 104 H. 341, 90 P.3d 233 (2004).
Petitioner's claim for alleged negligence by the department of education
(DOE)in evaluating petitioner's proposal, and in deciding the dispute with petitioner, was barred under this chapter because the DOE's conduct was not analogous to "a recognized claim for relief against a private person"; petitioner did not identify circumstances under which a private party could be sued for negligently applying the law, rules, or a request for proposals in awarding a government contract. 127 H. 263, 277 P.3d 988 (2012).
Where plaintiffs brought action against the State and department of transportation when rockfall struck plaintiffs' vehicle, the State's breach of its duty of care due to its failure to have a routine, coordinated system of rockfall mitigation at the operational level did not fall within the exception for waiver of immunity for tort liability under the State Tort Liability Act when claims were based on the performance or failure to perform a discretionary function on the part of a state officer or employee. 140 H. 36, 398 P.3d 625 (2017).
State has not waived sovereign immunity from 42 U.S.C. §1983 actions. 6 H. App. 397, 721 P.2d 165 (1986).