Relating To Abolition Of Joint And Several Liability For Government Entities In Highway-related Civil Actions.
Summary
HB996 would change Hawaii tort law to remove joint and several liability for government entities in civil actions involving the maintenance and design of highways. The bill specifically covers claims involving highway-related features such as guardrails, utility poles, street and directional signs, and other highway devices, and would limit a government entity’s exposure to only the percentage of damages actually attributable to that entity.
To do this, the bill amends sections 663-10.5 and 663-10.9 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes. It removes the existing highway-related exception that currently preserves joint and several liability in certain motor vehicle and highway-design cases, while leaving the broader structure of Hawaii’s joint-and-several-liability rules and other listed exceptions in place. The bill also states that it will not affect rights, duties, penalties, or proceedings that were already in place before the effective date.
Impact
The bill would narrow government liability in highway-related tort cases by shifting those claims to a comparative-fault approach for government entities, meaning the state or other public entity would pay only its apportioned share rather than the full amount if other tortfeasors are unable to pay. It would amend existing statutory exceptions to joint and several liability under chapter 663, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and specifically repeal the special treatment currently given to highway maintenance and design claims. The measure would apply prospectively only and would not disturb preexisting claims or proceedings.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of committee testimony or recorded votes, the available record suggests a policy-driven, liability-limiting proposal rather than one with documented public controversy in the materials provided. The bill’s framing emphasizes fairness and proportional responsibility for government entities, indicating support for reducing public exposure to damages beyond their share. No opposing or supporting testimony is included, so there is no direct evidence of broader stakeholder sentiment in the record provided.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely whether government entities should remain jointly liable in highway-design and maintenance cases, especially where injured parties may have difficulty recovering full damages from other responsible tortfeasors. Supporters would likely favor limiting public liability to the government’s actual fault share, while opponents may argue that removing joint and several liability could reduce compensation for plaintiffs in cases involving unsafe roads or roadway features. The bill also touches on the balance between fiscal protection for public entities and full recovery rights for injured persons, but no specific stakeholder positions are included in the provided history.