Hawaii's rule on filing a lawsuit without a lawyer turns on a feature the national template does not capture: Hawaii calls the opening paper a complaint. Self-represented parties file in Circuit Court (District Court for smaller civil cases). Individuals may appear pro se. Business entities generally require Hawaii counsel. The controlling authority is Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure. E-filing: Judiciary Electronic Filing and Service System (JEFS). Self-represented parties may use JEFS in many case types; District Court small claims still offers accessible over-the-counter filing. Service: Haw. R. Civ. P. 4. Small claims: District Court small-claims division (generally up to $5,000).
Key takeaways
- Individuals may appear pro se. Business entities generally require Hawaii counsel.
- Main trial forum: Circuit Court (District Court for smaller civil cases). Smaller disputes often belong in District Court small-claims division (generally up to $5,000).
- Procedure: Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure. Opening paper: a complaint.
- Service: Haw. R. Civ. P. 4. Serve under HRCP Rule 4 by personal service or authorized alternatives.
- E-filing: Judiciary Electronic Filing and Service System (JEFS). Self-represented parties may use JEFS in many case types; District Court small claims still offers accessible over-the-counter filing.
- Pair this page with the LawDiver search rail (scoped to Hawaii) and the Hawaii evidence guide.
Primary search phrases this page targets: file a lawsuit without a lawyer Hawaii; Hawaii pro se; JEFS Hawaii e-filing; how to sue in Hawaii.
Worked example under Hawaii law
The illustration below uses only rules already stated for Hawaii. It is a research hypothetical, not a prediction of what a court will do.
A person in Hawaii wants to sue without a lawyer and has not yet filed anything.
- Confirm you may appear without counsel: Individuals may appear pro se. Business entities generally require Hawaii counsel.
- Draft a complaint and file it in Circuit Court (District Court for smaller civil cases). E-filing: Self-represented parties may use JEFS in many case types; District Court small claims still offers accessible over-the-counter filing.
- Serve under Haw. R. Civ. P. 4. Serve under HRCP Rule 4 by personal service or authorized alternatives. Inter-island service planning matters — use a process server who can complete returns quickly. File proof of service.
- Expect discovery under HRCP Rules 26–37 govern discovery in Circuit Court. District Court civil uses simplified procedures. A jury demand follows Demand a jury under HRCP Rule 38 when eligible. Small claims are non-jury.
Missing service or a limitations deadline is not excused because the filer is pro se in Hawaii. The evidence companion is the Hawaii evidence guide.
Contents
- What is a statute, case, rule, and regulation?
- Can you litigate pro se in Hawaii?
- Role of the judge and the jury
- Pleadings: complaint, answer, and motions
- How to file and serve in Hawaii
- Registering for e-filing
- Discovery
- Rules of evidence (short tour)
- Summary judgment and other dispositive motions
- How LawDiver can help
- Hawaii case law highlights
- Frequently asked questions
What is a statute, case, rule, and regulation?
Self-represented litigants lose cases when they confuse sources of law. Use these definitions when you research on LawDiver:
| Source | What it is | How you use it in Hawaii |
|---|---|---|
| Statute | A law enacted by the legislature (or Congress) | Creates rights, duties, damages caps, notice periods, and causes of action |
| Case (opinion) | A written decision of a court resolving a dispute | Interprets statutes and rules; binds lower courts in the same hierarchy when it is controlling precedent |
| Court rule | A procedural regulation adopted by the judiciary | Tells you how to plead, serve, discover, and try a case — e.g. Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure |
| Regulation | A rule issued by an executive agency under statutory authority | Matters when your claim involves licensed industries, benefits, or administrative prerequisites |
| Local rule / administrative order | County- or court-specific filing practice | Often controls e-filing mandates, cover sheets, and hearing calendars |
A winning Hawaii theory usually needs all three of: (1) a substantive statute or common-law claim, (2) a pleading that satisfies the civil rules, and (3) admissible evidence under the Hawaii Rules of Evidence.
Can you litigate pro se in Hawaii?
Individuals may appear pro se. Business entities generally require Hawaii counsel.
Pro se (sometimes in propria persona or self-represented) means you speak for yourself. Courts often construe pro se papers liberally on formatting, but they do not invent claims you failed to plead, excuse missed statutes of limitation, or waive service defects. If a corporation is on the other side with counsel, you will still be held to the Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure.
Hawaii State Judiciary self-help pages publish District Court and family-court forms.
Hawaii opinions on pro se practice
Erum v. Llego.
Erum v. Llego., 465 P.3d 815 (2020)
…ice. The case involves a personal injury claim brought by a pro se litigant, who did not attend the pretrial FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER conference at which the oral motion to dismiss was made and granted. For the reasons discussed, we hold that the circuit court abused its discretion in granting the defendant’s oral motion to dismiss wi…
Practitioners open Erum v. Llego. when Hawaii pro se turns on the distinction in this sentence: "The case involves a personal injury claim brought by a pro se litigant, who did not attend the pretrial FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER conference at which the oral motion to dismiss was made and granted." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Thomas LEPERE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED PUBLIC WORKERS, LOCAL 646, AFL-CIO, Defendant-Appellee
…ether the circuit court abused its discretion by ordering a pro se 2 plaintiff to pay defendant’s attorney’s fees, where attorney’s fees were generated in part by the court’s order (to plaintiff) to file a motion for reconsideration. HRCP Rule 11 provides in relevant part: The signature of an attorney or party constitutes a certificate by him that he has read the pleading, moti…
Thomas LEPERE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED PUBLIC WORKERS, LOCAL 646, AFL-CIO, Defendant-Appellee is worth reading on Hawaii pro se because the court put the point in its own words: "ether the circuit court abused its discretion by ordering a pro se 2 plaintiff to pay defendant’s attorney’s fees, where attorney’s fees were generated in part by the court’s order (to plaintiff) to file a motion for reconsideration. HRCP Rule 11 provides in relevant part: The si" Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In the Matter of the Unauthorized Practice of Law of MR. WILLIAM S. ELLIS, JR., Trustee for the Creditors and
…us to resolve is whether Mr. Ellis as said trustee, in his pro se practice of law, represents himself as trustee or is, in effect, actually representing the interest of another person and thus is guilty of unauthorized practice of law. I. THE TRUSTEESHIP OF MR. ELLIS At common law, in the absence of statute, when a corporation was effectively dissolved its existence as a legal…
In the Matter of the Unauthorized Practice of Law of MR. WILLIAM S. ELLIS, JR., Trustee for the Creditors and is worth reading on Hawaii pro se because the court put the point in its own words: "Mr. Ellis as said trustee, in his pro se practice of law, represents himself as trustee or is, in effect, actually representing the interest of another person and thus is guilty of unauthorized practice of law. I. THE TRUSTEESHIP OF MR." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Vincent M. SETALA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J.C. PENNEY COMPANY, Sharlene Pacheco, Lamar Kauffman, Ryan Takahashi
…ule 4(a) on the day it is tendered to prison officials by a pro se prisoner. Accordingly, we remand this case to the first circuit court (the court)1 for an evidentiary hearing, consistent with this opinion, on the issue of whether Plaintiff-Appellant Vincent M. Setala (Plaintiff) tendered his notice of appeal to prison officials on or before the deadline. I. This case arises o…
Practitioners open Vincent M. SETALA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J.C. PENNEY COMPANY, Sharlene Pacheco, Lamar Kauffman, Ryan Takahashi when Hawaii pro se turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Accordingly, we remand this case to the first circuit court (the court)1 for an evidentiary hearing, consistent with this opinion, on the issue of whether Plaintiff-Appellant Vincent M. Setala (Plaintiff) tendered his notice of appeal to prison officials on or before the deadline." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Alexander & Baldwin , LLC v. Armitage.
Alexander & Baldwin , LLC v. Armitage., 151 Haw. 37 (2022)
…mes identified himself in filings only as “NELSON ARMITAGE, Pro Se,” he signed other filings as foreign minister of the Reinstated Hawaiian Nation. Noa was not a defendant, although he was sometimes referred to as a defendant pro se and sometimes represented himself as such. Both filed motions and responded to A&B’s motions. For example, Noa filed a motion to dismiss A&B’s comp…
Practitioners open Alexander & Baldwin , LLC v. Armitage. when Hawaii pro se turns on the distinction in this sentence: "NELSON ARMITAGE, Pro Se,” he signed other filings as foreign minister of the Reinstated Hawaiian Nation. Noa was not a defendant, although he was sometimes referred to as a defendant pro se and sometimes represented himself as such." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
WILLIAM S. ELLIS, JR., Trustee in Dissolution for Kula Development Corporation, WILLIAM S. ELLIS, JR., Individually
…laintiffs, the Appellant William S. Ellis, Jr. had appeared pro se in behalf of the interest held by her in the partnership. The other partners (other plaintiffs) were represented by counsel. When Kula Development Corporation was involuntarily dissolved, the Appellant William S. Ellis, Jr. was appointed sole successor trustee and was substituted, pro se, as sole trustee on beha…
WILLIAM S. ELLIS, JR., Trustee in Dissolution for Kula Development Corporation, WILLIAM S. ELLIS, JR., Individually is worth reading on Hawaii pro se because the court put the point in its own words: "Appellant William S. Ellis, Jr. had appeared pro se in behalf of the interest held by her in the partnership. The other partners (other plaintiffs) were represented by counsel. When Kula Development Corporation was involuntarily dissolved, the Appellant William S. Ellis, Jr." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Role of the judge and the jury
- The judge decides questions of law: what the statute means, whether a pleading states a claim, which evidence is admissible, and how the jury (if any) is instructed. In bench trials and most small-claims matters, the judge also finds the facts.
- The jury decides disputed questions of fact in jury-eligible civil cases when a timely demand is made and any jury fee is paid.
- Demand a jury under HRCP Rule 38 when eligible. Small claims are non-jury.
Practical tip: decide before filing whether you want a jury. Late demands are often waived. Small-claims paths (District Court small-claims division) usually trade speed for no jury and limited discovery.
Pleadings: complaint, answer, and motions
Pleadings are the formal papers that frame the lawsuit. In Hawaii the plaintiff's opening paper is typically a complaint. It should:
- Identify the parties and the court (Circuit Court (District Court for smaller civil cases) or the small-claims forum).
- Allege facts that, if true, entitle you to relief under a recognized claim.
- Demand judgment (money, injunction, declaratory relief, or other remedies the court can grant).
- Include a jury demand if you want one and the claim is jury-triable.
The defendant responds with an answer (admissions, denials, affirmative defenses) and/or a motion to dismiss challenging legal sufficiency, jurisdiction, or service. Later motions (compel discovery, summary judgment, limine) are usually not “pleadings” in the technical sense, but they drive most civil cases.
Hawaii pleadings opinions
Danny Harris JENKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CADES SCHUTTE FLEMING & WRIGHT, Attorneys at Law, Licensed to Do
…n’s (Zions) motions to dismiss Jenkins’ complaint and first amended complaint. Appellees Jacksons and Zions contest appellate jurisdiction by means of statements contesting jurisdiction filed pursuant to Rule 12.1 of the Hawai'i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP). Appellant Jenkins, pro se, did not file a statement of jurisdiction although he was required to do so by HRAP 12.1…
Danny Harris JENKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CADES SCHUTTE FLEMING & WRIGHT, Attorneys at Law, Licensed to Do is worth reading on Hawaii pleadings because the court put the point in its own words: "Zions) motions to dismiss Jenkins’ complaint and first amended complaint. Appellees Jacksons and Zions contest appellate jurisdiction by means of statements contesting jurisdiction filed pursuant to Rule 12.1 of the Hawai'i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP)." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Erum v. Llego.
Erum v. Llego., 465 P.3d 815 (2020)
…ranting by the circuit court of a defendant’s ex parte oral motion to dismiss a case with prejudice. The case involves a personal injury claim brought by a pro se litigant, who did not attend the pretrial FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER conference at which the oral motion to dismiss was made and granted. For the reasons discussed, we hold th…
Hawaii opinions such as Erum v. Llego. are cited where pleadings is disputed. The court stated: "The case involves a personal injury claim brought by a pro se litigant, who did not attend the pretrial FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER conference at which the oral motion to dismiss was made and granted." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
William S. Ellis, Jr., Et Al. v. William F. Crockett, Et Al.
William S. Ellis, Jr., Et Al. v. William F. Crockett, Et Al., 51 Haw. 45 (1969)
…s that we consider necessary to answer are: (1) whether the motion to dismiss was properly granted, and (2) if so, whether, under H.R.C.P., Rule 15(a), the plaintiffs had a right to file an amended complaint after the trial court orally granted the motion to dismiss and before the order was filed. Other specifications of error, except the specification numbered 4, which is prem…
Hawaii opinions such as William S. Ellis, Jr., Et Al. v. William F. Crockett, Et Al. are cited where pleadings is disputed. The court stated: "H.R.C.P., Rule 15(a), the plaintiffs had a right to file an amended complaint after the trial court orally granted the motion to dismiss and before the order was filed." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Sandra DUNLEA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard DAPPEN, Defendant-Appellee, and John Doe Natural Persons 1-10; John
…27, 1993 order granting defendant-appellee Howard Dappen’s motion to dismiss her claim of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) with prejudice on the basis that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations; (2) February 9, 1994 order granting Dappen’s motion for summary judgment with respect to Dunlea’s claims of defamation and intentional and/or negligent infliction of emotional…
Hawaii opinions such as Sandra DUNLEA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard DAPPEN, Defendant-Appellee, and John Doe Natural Persons 1-10; John are cited where pleadings is disputed. The court stated: "27, 1993 order granting defendant-appellee Howard Dappen’s motion to dismiss her claim of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) with prejudice on the basis that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations; (2) February 9, 1994 order granting Dappen’s motion for summary judgment wit" That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Linda C. TSEU, in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Ex Relatione
…ss, and hurt Wheelwright. On June 7, 1994, the HCRC filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim. In its motion, HCRC argued that: (1) the claims were barred either by the State Tort Liability Act’s discretionary function exception or because alternative remedies existed; (2) the negligent investigation claim was a novel legal theory that should not be cognizable against the Stat…
Hawaii opinions such as Linda C. TSEU, in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Ex Relatione are cited where pleadings is disputed. The court stated: "Wheelwright. On June 7, 1994, the HCRC filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
CIVIL BEAT LAW CENTER FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU and
…oin Kealoha as a party to the action. The Appellees filed a motion to dismiss, which the circuit court granted on all counts. Civil Beat appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA), and we accepted transfer of this case to resolve matters of first impression concerning the meaning and scope of the Sunshine Law's open meeting requirement, personnel-privacy exception, and…
On pleadings, CIVIL BEAT LAW CENTER FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU and speaks to the Hawaii dispute in this passage: "Kealoha as a party to the action. The Appellees filed a motion to dismiss, which the circuit court granted on all counts." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
In the Matter of the Complaint of Jack E. Vockrodt and Euphence F. Vockrodt to Establish Title to Land Situate on
…int. On November 28, the trial court denied the appellants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. On December 2, the court granted the appellants permission to file an interlocutory appeal. They filed their notice of appeal on December 12. On December 5, the trial court entered the defaults of fifteen of the twenty-one persons who had appeared at the hearing for failure to file answ…
Hawaii opinions such as In the Matter of the Complaint of Jack E. Vockrodt and Euphence F. Vockrodt to Establish Title to Land Situate on are cited where pleadings is disputed. The court stated: "On November 28, the trial court denied the appellants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. On December 2, the court granted the appellants permission to file an interlocutory appeal. They filed their notice of appeal on December 12." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Mark K. ADAMS and Joanie Adams and Nelson Koon Sung Ng and Zinnia K.L. Ng v. DOLE FOOD COMPANY, INC., Dole Fresh
…light of the circuit court’s grant of the Dole Defendants’ motion to dismiss the claims asserted against them (Motion to Dismiss) and the circuit court’s denial of the Plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint (Motion to Amend). Following the circuit court’s rulings on the Motion to Dismiss and the Motion to Amend, the circuit court granted the Plaintiffs’ motion pursuant to…
Mark K. ADAMS and Joanie Adams and Nelson Koon Sung Ng and Zinnia K.L. Ng v. DOLE FOOD COMPANY, INC., Dole Fresh is worth reading on Hawaii pleadings because the court put the point in its own words: "Dole Defendants’ motion to dismiss the claims asserted against them (Motion to Dismiss) and the circuit court’s denial of the Plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint (Motion to Amend)." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
How to file and serve in Hawaii
Filing
- Choose the correct forum: Circuit Court (District Court for smaller civil cases) for larger or complex civil cases; District Court small-claims division when your claim fits generally up to $5,000.
- Prepare the complaint (and any required cover sheet, civil case information statement, or summons).
- Pay the filing fee or apply for a fee waiver / indigency finding as Hawaii practice allows.
- Obtain a signed summons (or local equivalent) from the clerk after the case is opened.
Governing procedure: Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure.
Service of process
Filing alone does not start the clock against the defendant in a meaningful way — service does. Authority: Haw. R. Civ. P. 4.
Serve under HRCP Rule 4 by personal service or authorized alternatives. Inter-island service planning matters — use a process server who can complete returns quickly. File proof of service.
Defective service is one of the most common reasons pro se cases are dismissed without prejudice (or worse, delayed until limitations problems appear). Keep copies of every affidavit or return.
Hawaii service opinions
Tropic Builders, Ltd. v. Naval Ammunition Depot Lualualei Quarters, Inc., Sam Len, Dba the Len Company & Associates
…the agent-designated by the Delaware Corporation to receive service of process in the State of Hawaii. (21) * Notice [of mechanic’s and materialman’s lien] was served on the said David Kim and the serving officer in his return stated that he had served it on the said David Kim as agent for Respondent Delaware Corporation and Respondent Aloha. Petitioner filed its suit herei…
Practitioners open Tropic Builders, Ltd. v. Naval Ammunition Depot Lualualei Quarters, Inc., Sam Len, Dba the Len Company & Associates when Hawaii service of process turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Delaware Corporation to receive service of process in the State of Hawaii." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
John T.S. SHIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lisa McLAUGHLIN, Defendant-Appellee, and John and Jane Does 1-10, and Doe
…s subject to the jurisdiction of our courts and amenable to service of process under our long-arm statutes as set forth in HRS §§ 634-33 (1985) 4 and 634-36 (1985). 5 *4 A. The Purposes and Intent Of HRS § 657-18. HRS § 657-18 reads as follows: If at any time when a cause of action specified in this part or section 668-3 accrues against any person, the person is out of the Stat…
Hawaii opinions such as John T.S. SHIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lisa McLAUGHLIN, Defendant-Appellee, and John and Jane Does 1-10, and Doe are cited where service of process is disputed. The court stated: "HRS §§ 634-33 (1985) 4 and 634-36 (1985). 5 *4 A. The Purposes and Intent Of HRS § 657-18." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Takako ETO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ryu MURANAKA, Defendant-Appellee, and John Does 1-10, Jane Does 1-10, Doe
…for service: Plaintiffs motion is denied without prejudice. Service of process, if any, upon Defendant was untimely based upon the Honorable Virginia Lea Crandall’s last order extending time for service. Plaintiff must apply to Judge Crandall if Plaintiff seeks a nunc pro tunc ruling extending time for service. The granting of such a motion by Judge Crandall may constitute neiv…
Takako ETO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ryu MURANAKA, Defendant-Appellee, and John Does 1-10, Jane Does 1-10, Doe is worth reading on Hawaii service of process because the court put the point in its own words: "Plaintiffs motion is denied without prejudice. Service of process, if any, upon Defendant was untimely based upon the Honorable Virginia Lea Crandall’s last order extending time for service." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In the Matter of the Complaint of Jack E. Vockrodt and Euphence F. Vockrodt to Establish Title to Land Situate on
…al jurisdiction, insufficiency of process, insufficiency of service of process, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. On October 28, the trial court entered the defaults of all persons except twenty-one persons who had appeared at the hearing on October 19. Those twenty-one were given until December 1 to answer the complaint. On November 28, the trial c…
In the Matter of the Complaint of Jack E. Vockrodt and Euphence F. Vockrodt to Establish Title to Land Situate on is worth reading on Hawaii service of process because the court put the point in its own words: "On October 28, the trial court entered the defaults of all persons except twenty-one persons who had appeared at the hearing on October 19. Those twenty-one were given until December 1 to answer the complaint." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Valerie Monge PUCKETT v. Jeffrey R. PUCKETT
Valerie Monge PUCKETT v. Jeffrey R. PUCKETT, 94 Haw. 471 (2000)
…ack of in “personam jurisdiction over him, insufficiency of service of process, or lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On June 17, 1998, a hearing on Wife’s Motion for Pre-Decree Relief was held. Husband personally appeared at the hearing, along with one of his attorneys, Emmanuel Guerrero. At the hearing, Husband orally contested the family court’s subject matter jurisdiction…
On service of process, Valerie Monge PUCKETT v. Jeffrey R. PUCKETT speaks to the Hawaii dispute in this passage: "On June 17, 1998, a hearing on Wife’s Motion for Pre-Decree Relief was held. Husband personally appeared at the hearing, along with one of his attorneys, Emmanuel Guerrero." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
In the Matter of the Lease Cancellation of HILBERT C.K. SMITH, Lot No. 44, Anahola, Kauai, Hawaii
…to an agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process. Despite the clear and mandatory provisions of HRCP Rule 4 above quoted, no summons was issued by the clerk of the Fifth Circuit in this case. Instead, a “Notice of Petition for Writ of Assistance” and an “Amended Notice of Hearing on Petition for Writ of Assistance” appear in the file. They were sig…
On service of process, In the Matter of the Lease Cancellation of HILBERT C.K. SMITH, Lot No. 44, Anahola, Kauai, Hawaii speaks to the Hawaii dispute in this passage: "Despite the clear and mandatory provisions of HRCP Rule 4 above quoted, no summons was issued by the clerk of the Fifth Circuit in this case." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Ronald Keith Manley, a Minor, by Blaine Manley, His Guardian Ad Litem v. Dorothy K. Nelson. Joseph Nick Manganaro
…ases. Section 230-33, R.L.H. 1955, as amended, provides for service of process and notice on a nonresident motorist, or a resident motorist who subsequent to a collision leaves the State of Hawaii, in suits or actions against him growing out of any accident or collision involving a motor vehicle operated by him in the State of Hawaii. This section provides that the Director of…
Hawaii opinions such as Ronald Keith Manley, a Minor, by Blaine Manley, His Guardian Ad Litem v. Dorothy K. Nelson. Joseph Nick Manganaro are cited where service of process is disputed. The court stated: "State of Hawaii, in suits or actions against him growing out of any accident or collision involving a motor vehicle operated by him in the State of Hawaii." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Registering for e-filing
Hawaii's primary electronic filing path is Judiciary Electronic Filing and Service System (JEFS).
How to register: Register for JEFS through the Hawaii State Judiciary, complete training if required, and link payment for filing fees or submit a fee-waiver request.
Pro se reality check: Self-represented parties may use JEFS in many case types; District Court small claims still offers accessible over-the-counter filing.
When you e-file:
- Use PDF/A or the portal's accepted formats; flatten forms before upload.
- Check that party names match the caption exactly.
- Calendar the clerk's acceptance email — a rejected filing is often treated as unfiled.
- Serve other parties under the rules (e-service through the portal may not replace initial service of process).
Discovery
After pleadings, parties exchange information. In Hawaii:
HRCP Rules 26–37 govern discovery in Circuit Court. District Court civil uses simplified procedures.
Typical tools:
- Interrogatories — written questions answered under oath.
- Requests for production — documents, ESI, and tangible things.
- Requests for admission — force yes/no authenticity or fact stipulations.
- Depositions — live testimony under oath (expensive; plan carefully if you are self-represented).
If the other side stonewalls, a motion to compel and, later, sanctions motions are the enforcement path. Courts expect meet-and-confer first in most jurisdictions.
Hawaii discovery opinions
Anna HAC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I; Paul Yuen; Shu Lin; Bharat Kinariwala; N. Thomas Gaarder
…not abuse its discretion in (1) denying a motion to compel discovery by Plaintiff-Appellant Anna Hae (Plaintiff) without prejudice and providing her an opportunity to tailor her discovery request or re-file her motion, and (2) granting the motion in limine of Defendants-Appellees University of Hawai'i, Paul Yuen, Shu Lin, Bha-rat Kinariwala, N. Thomas Gaarder, James Holm-Kenne…
Anna HAC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I; Paul Yuen; Shu Lin; Bharat Kinariwala; N. Thomas Gaarder is worth reading on Hawaii discovery because the court put the point in its own words: "Plaintiff-Appellant Anna Hae (Plaintiff) without prejudice and providing her an opportunity to tailor her discovery request or re-file her motion, and (2) granting the motion in limine of Defendants-Appellees University of Hawai'i, Paul Yuen, Shu Lin, Bha-rat Kinariwala, N." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Rick RALSTON, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Errol Y.W. YIM, D.D.S., Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee
…noted that Ralston did not have “adequate time” to conduct discovery, and that Ralston’s ease was accordingly distinguishable from the leading federal case of Celotex Corporation v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986) (noting that “the plain language of Rule 56(e) mandates the entry of summary judgment, after adequate time for discovery and upon motion…
Rick RALSTON, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Errol Y.W. YIM, D.D.S., Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee is worth reading on Hawaii discovery because the court put the point in its own words: "Ralston did not have “adequate time” to conduct discovery, and that Ralston’s ease was accordingly distinguishable from the leading federal case of Celotex Corporation v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Bobbie L. FRENCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HAWAII PIZZA HUT, INC., Defendant-Appellee
…t erred in denying portions of Appellant’s Motion to Compel Discovery. I. In June 1994, Appellant was hired by Pizza Hut as an assistant restaurant manager and was promoted to restaurant manager in August 1994. In February 1995, Appellant was transferred to the Kaimukli Pizza Hut restaurant. In April 1995, Appellant notified her supervisor that she would undergo bladder surgery…
On discovery, Bobbie L. FRENCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HAWAII PIZZA HUT, INC., Defendant-Appellee speaks to the Hawaii dispute in this passage: "Appellant’s Motion to Compel Discovery. I. In June 1994, Appellant was hired by Pizza Hut as an assistant restaurant manager and was promoted to restaurant manager in August 1994. In February 1995, Appellant was transferred to the Kaimukli Pizza Hut restaurant." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Sandra DUNLEA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard DAPPEN, Defendant-Appellee, and John Doe Natural Persons 1-10; John
…peals from certain of the circuit court’s rulings regarding discovery matters. For the reasons discussed below, we: (1) vacate the circuit court’s order dismissing Dunlea’s claim of CSA and remand this case for trial on the CSA claim; (2) affirm the order granting summary judgment in favor of Dappen on Dunlea’s defamation and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional di…
Sandra DUNLEA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard DAPPEN, Defendant-Appellee, and John Doe Natural Persons 1-10; John is worth reading on Hawaii discovery because the court put the point in its own words: "peals from certain of the circuit court’s rulings regarding discovery matters. For the reasons discussed below, we: (1) vacate the circuit court’s order dismissing Dunlea’s claim of CSA and remand this case for trial on the CSA claim; (2) affirm the order granting summary judgmen" Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
W. H. SHIPMAN, LIMITED v. HAWAIIAN HOLIDAY MACADAMIA NUT CO., INC.
W. H. SHIPMAN, LIMITED v. HAWAIIAN HOLIDAY MACADAMIA NUT CO., INC., 8 Haw. App. 354 (1990)
…lower court abused its discretion in imposing on it extreme discovery sanctions, thereby precluding it from resisting Shipman’s motion for summary judgment. We agree and vacate the judgment. DeDomenico Orchards, Inc. (DeDomenico Orchards), a general partner of Keaau Agriculture, appeals the lower court’s denial of its Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure (HRCP) Rule 19(a) motion to…
Hawaii opinions such as W. H. SHIPMAN, LIMITED v. HAWAIIAN HOLIDAY MACADAMIA NUT CO., INC. are cited where discovery is disputed. The court stated: "Shipman’s motion for summary judgment. We agree and vacate the judgment. DeDomenico Orchards, Inc." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
MAHER A. A. AZER, doing business as KAPIOLANI BUSINESS CENTRE v. THE COURTHOUSE RACQUETBALL CORPORATION, a Hawai'i
…support the damages alleged in Paragraph 28. The following discovery steps are pertinent to this appeal: (1) October 8, 1987: Plaintiffs First Request for Answers to Interrogatories (First Interrogatory Request). Interrogatories 10 through 14 (Interrogatories 10-14) requested information relating to the Counterclaim, including the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the…
MAHER A. A. AZER, doing business as KAPIOLANI BUSINESS CENTRE v. THE COURTHOUSE RACQUETBALL CORPORATION, a Hawai'i is worth reading on Hawaii discovery because the court put the point in its own words: "Paragraph 28. The following discovery steps are pertinent to this appeal: (1) October 8, 1987: Plaintiffs First Request for Answers to Interrogatories (First Interrogatory Request)." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
The BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON fka The Bank of New York, as Trustee for the Certificateholders of the CHL Mortgage
…“Order Denying [Dermabelle’s] Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery Requests and Motion for Attorney Fees” (Order Denying Dermabelle’s First Motion to Compel), entered September 5, 2014; (2) the denial of “[Dermabelle’s] Second Motion to Compel Discovery Requests and Motion for Attorney’s Fees” (Denial of Der-mabelle’s Second Motion to Compel);1 and (3) the “Findings of Fact…
On discovery, The BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON fka The Bank of New York, as Trustee for the Certificateholders of the CHL Mortgage speaks to the Hawaii dispute in this passage: "“Order Denying [Dermabelle’s] Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery Requests and Motion for Attorney Fees” (Order Denying Dermabelle’s First Motion to Compel), entered September 5, 2014; (2) the denial of “[Dermabelle’s] Second Motion to Compel Discovery Requests and Motion for" The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Rules of evidence (short tour)
Trials and many motion hearings are decided on admissible evidence, not on what you know happened. Hawaii applies the Hawaii Rules of Evidence. Core ideas:
- Relevance — does the proof make a fact of consequence more or less probable?
- Authenticity — is the exhibit what you claim it is?
- Hearsay — is an out-of-court statement offered for its truth, and if so, does an exception apply?
- Privileges — attorney-client, spousal, and other privileges can block inquiry even when the facts are relevant.
For a full Hawaii walkthrough of hearsay, business records, authenticity, and depositions at trial, read the companion guide: Hawaii Evidence Law: Admissibility, Hearsay, and Authenticity.
Summary judgment and other dispositive motions
Many civil cases never reach a jury. A party may move for summary judgment by showing there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Pro se litigants lose these motions when they respond with argument instead of affidavits, authenticated exhibits, and pinpoint record citations.
Hawaii summary-judgment opinions
DAIRY ROAD PARTNERS, Dba Dairy Road Shell, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, and Shell Oil Company, Plaintiff, v
…ranting in part and denying in part their cross-motions for summary judgment. The case arises out of a complaint filed by the plaintiff-appellee/cross-appellant Dairy Road Partners, dba Dairy Road Shell [hereinafter, DRP], and the plaintiff Shell Oil Company [hereinafter, Shell] seeking a declaration that the defendant-appellant/cross-appellee Island Insurance Company [hereinaf…
Hawaii opinions such as DAIRY ROAD PARTNERS, Dba Dairy Road Shell, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, and Shell Oil Company, Plaintiff, v are cited where summary judgment is disputed. The court stated: "ranting in part and denying in part their cross-motions for summary judgment. The case arises out of a complaint filed by the plaintiff-appellee/cross-appellant Dairy Road Partners, dba Dairy Road Shell [hereinafter, DRP], and the plaintiff Shell Oil Company [hereinafter, Shell]" That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Successor by Merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP Fka Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP
…edings. We consider whether a foreclosing plaintiff seeking summary judgment must prove it had standing to foreclose on the homeowner’s property at the commencement of the lawsuit to be entitled to foreclosure of the subject property. We also determine the extent of appellate jurisdiction over interlocutory orders leading up to a foreclosure decree. I. BACKGROUND The subject of…
On summary judgment, BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Successor by Merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP Fka Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP speaks to the Hawaii dispute in this passage: "We consider whether a foreclosing plaintiff seeking summary judgment must prove it had standing to foreclose on the homeowner’s property at the commencement of the lawsuit to be entitled to foreclosure of the subject property." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Rick RALSTON, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Errol Y.W. YIM, D.D.S., Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee
…nsider the evidentiary burden that must be satisfied before summary judgment can be granted. Plaintiff Rick Ralston sued his dentist, Dr. Errol Y.W. Yim, claiming that Dr. Yim had negligently provided him with orthodontic care to correct overcrowding in his lower front teeth. Dr. Yim moved for summary judgment. At the first hearing on the motion, the circuit court sua sponte or…
On summary judgment, Rick RALSTON, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Errol Y.W. YIM, D.D.S., Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee speaks to the Hawaii dispute in this passage: "Plaintiff Rick Ralston sued his dentist, Dr. Errol Y.W. Yim, claiming that Dr. Yim had negligently provided him with orthodontic care to correct overcrowding in his lower front teeth. Dr. Yim moved for summary judgment." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Bobbie L. FRENCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HAWAII PIZZA HUT, INC., Defendant-Appellee
…Revised Statutes (HRS) § 378-1 (1993) was inappropriate for summary judgment. Determination of this issue requires an individualized inquiry. Because, contrary to this precept the circuit court of the first circuit1 (the court) granted summary judgment to Defendant-Appellee Hawaii Pizza Hut Inc. (Pizza Hut) with respect to the HRS § 378-2 (Supp.1998) disability discrimination c…
Practitioners open Bobbie L. FRENCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HAWAII PIZZA HUT, INC., Defendant-Appellee when Hawaii summary judgment turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Revised Statutes (HRS) § 378-1 (1993) was inappropriate for summary judgment. Determination of this issue requires an individualized inquiry." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Benjamin QUERUBIN; Carolyn Taketa, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Juanita Querubin, Deceased
…granting the defendant-appellee Olaf Thro-nas’s motion for summary judgment (MSJ) via joinder in the MSJ of the third-party defendant County of Kaua'i [hereinafter, “the County”] [collectively hereinafter, “the order granting Thronas’s MSJ via joinder”]. On appeal, the Appellants argue: (1) that they “were deprived of their constitutional right to due process of law” because (…
On summary judgment, Benjamin QUERUBIN; Carolyn Taketa, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Juanita Querubin, Deceased speaks to the Hawaii dispute in this passage: "Olaf Thro-nas’s motion for summary judgment (MSJ) via joinder in the MSJ of the third-party defendant County of Kaua'i [hereinafter, “the County”] [collectively hereinafter, “the order granting Thronas’s MSJ via joinder”]." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Sandra DUNLEA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard DAPPEN, Defendant-Appellee, and John Doe Natural Persons 1-10; John
…ns; (2) February 9, 1994 order granting Dappen’s motion for summary judgment with respect to Dunlea’s claims of defamation and intentional and/or negligent infliction of emotional distress; and (3) October 31, 1994 final judgment in favor of Dappen. Dunlea also appeals from certain of the circuit court’s rulings regarding discovery matters. For the reasons discussed below, we:…
Practitioners open Sandra DUNLEA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard DAPPEN, Defendant-Appellee, and John Doe Natural Persons 1-10; John when Hawaii summary judgment turns on the distinction in this sentence: "February 9, 1994 order granting Dappen’s motion for summary judgment with respect to Dunlea’s claims of defamation and intentional and/or negligent infliction of emotional distress; and (3) October 31, 1994 final judgment in favor of Dappen." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Tara THOMAS, Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Grant K. KIDANI, Respondent/Defendant-Appellee
…Kidani filed, and the circuit court granted, his motion for summary judgment. The Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) affirmed. Thomas v. Kidani, No. 29456, 2010 WL 3349523 (App. Aug. 26, 2010) (SDO). Thomas filed a timely application for writ of certiorari. We granted certiorari to clarify the standard of review for an appeal from a motion for summary judgment and also to clar…
Practitioners open Tara THOMAS, Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Grant K. KIDANI, Respondent/Defendant-Appellee when Hawaii summary judgment turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Kidani filed, and the circuit court granted, his motion for summary judgment. The Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) affirmed. Thomas v. Kidani, No. 29456, 2010 WL 3349523 (App. Aug. 26, 2010) (SDO). Thomas filed a timely application for writ of certiorari." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
How LawDiver can help
LawDiver is built for researching the same authorities a courtroom expects — not for inventing cites.
- LawDiver search — From this guide page, the search rail is scoped to Hawaii. Search phrases like
pro se,service of process,motion to compel, or your statute number. - Corpus-linked opinions — Every case block above links to a
/casedisplayopinion id that exists in LawDiver's caselaw corpus. Do not paste outside citations into filings unless you have verified them. - Statutes — Where Hawaii codes are mirrored, open the linked statute sections from this article and read the live text before quoting.
- GoodLaw / citator workflow — Before you rely on an older opinion, check how later Hawaii cases treat it.
- Evidence companion — Use the Hawaii evidence guide when you are preparing exhibits or opposing a motion in limine.
- AI research with grounding — Prefer tools that require retrieval from your matter and the LawDiver corpus over chatbots that invent case names.
LawDiver does not file documents for you, give legal advice, or replace a lawyer when the stakes, opposing counsel, or entity-representation rules require one.
Hawaii case law highlights
Use the topic sections above for pro se practice, pleadings, service, discovery, and summary judgment. Re-run LawDiver searches before hearings — new published opinions appear continuously.
Checklist before you file in Hawaii
- Confirm you (not an entity) may appear pro se for this claim.
- Pick District Court small-claims division vs Circuit Court (District Court for smaller civil cases) based on amount and remedy.
- Draft a complaint that states facts and a legal theory.
- Register on Judiciary Electronic Filing and Service System (JEFS) (or confirm paper filing is allowed).
- Arrange proper service under Haw. R. Civ. P. 4.
- Calendar answer deadlines, discovery cutoffs, and any jury-demand deadline.
- Research controlling Hawaii cases and the Hawaii Rules of Evidence on LawDiver.
- Consider limited-scope or full representation if the other side has counsel or the claim exceeds small-claims complexity.
Frequently asked questions
How do I file a lawsuit without a lawyer in Hawaii?
Prepare a complaint, file it in the correct Hawaii court (Circuit Court (District Court for smaller civil cases) or District Court small-claims division), pay or waive the fee, obtain a summons, and complete service under Haw. R. Civ. P. 4. Register for Judiciary Electronic Filing and Service System (JEFS) when e-filing is required or available.
What is the difference between a statute and a court rule?
A statute creates substantive rights and duties. A court rule (such as Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure) controls procedure — captions, service, discovery, and trial mechanics. You usually need both.
Do I need to register for e-filing?
Self-represented parties may use JEFS in many case types; District Court small claims still offers accessible over-the-counter filing. Registration steps: Register for JEFS through the Hawaii State Judiciary, complete training if required, and link payment for filing fees or submit a fee-waiver request.
Will I get a jury?
Demand a jury under HRCP Rule 38 when eligible. Small claims are non-jury.
What happens in discovery?
HRCP Rules 26–37 govern discovery in Circuit Court. District Court civil uses simplified procedures.
How does LawDiver help a pro se litigant?
It lets you search and read Hawaii opinions and statutes that actually exist in the LawDiver corpus, with links you can verify — reducing the risk of hallucinated citations — while you still remain responsible for filing, service, and courtroom advocacy.
Disclaimer
LawDiver publishes this guide for public legal-information and SEO education purposes. It is not a substitute for advice from a licensed Hawaii attorney. Court rules, e-filing vendors, fee schedules, and jurisdictional limits change. Verify every citation and deadline against official Hawaii sources and the live LawDiver corpus before relying on them in a filing.