§1-1  Common law of the State; exceptions. The common law of England, as ascertained by English and American decisions, isdeclared to be the common law of the State of Hawaii in all cases, except asotherwise expressly provided by the Constitution or laws of the United States,or by the laws of the State, or fixed by Hawaiian judicial precedent, orestablished by Hawaiian usage; provided that no person shall be subject tocriminal proceedings except as provided by the written laws of the UnitedStates or of the State. [L 1892, c 57, §5; am L 1903, c 32, §2; RL 1925, §1; RL1935, §1; RL 1945, §1; RL 1955, §1-1; HRS §1-1]

 

Attorney General Opinions

 

  Common-law authority establishes that governmental bodiespossess inherent power to receive gifts to be used in implementing theirfunctions.  Att. Gen. Op. 92-4.

 

Law Journals and Reviews

 

  Beach Access:  A Public Right?  23 HBJ 65.

  Native Hawaiian Cultural Practices Under Threat.  I HBJ No.13, at pg. 1.

  On the Reception of the Common Law in the Hawaiian Islands. III HBJ No. 13, at pg. 87.

  The Lum Court and Native Hawaiian Rights.  14 UH L. Rev. 377.

  Pele Defense Fund v. Paty:  Exacerbating the InherentConflict Between Hawaiian Native Tenant Access and Gathering Rights and WesternProperty Rights.  16 UH L. Rev. 207.

  Public Access Shoreline Hawaii v. Hawaii County PlanningCommission:  The Affirmative Duty to Consider the Effect of Development onNative Hawaiian Gathering Rights.  16 UH L. Rev. 303.

  The Reassertion of Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights WithinThe Context of Hawai‘i's Western System of Land Tenure.  17 UH L. Rev. 165.

  Cultures in Conflict in Hawai‘i:  The Law and Politics ofNative Hawaiian Water Rights.  18 UH L. Rev. 71.

  Customary Revolutions:  The Law of Custom and the Conflict ofTraditions in Hawai‘i.  20 UH L. Rev. 99.

  The Backlash Against PASH:  Legislative Attempts To RestrictNative Hawaiian Rights.  20 UH L. Rev. 321.

  The Latest Take on Background Principles and the States' Lawof Property After Lucas and Palazzolo.  24 UH L. Rev. 497.

  Loko i‘a:  A Legal Guide to the Restoration of NativeHawaiian Fishponds Within the Western Paradigm.  24 UH L. Rev. 657.

  Wiping Out the Ban on Surfboards at Point Panic.  27 UH L.Rev. 303.

  Biopiracy in Paradise?:  Fulfilling the Legal Duty toRegulate Bioprospecting in Hawai‘i.  28 UH L. Rev. 387.

  The Hawaiian Usage Exception to the Common Law:  AnInoculation Against the Effects of Western Influence.  30 UH L. Rev. 319.

  Public Beach Access:  A Right for All?  Opening the Gate toIroquois Point Beach.  30 UH L. Rev. 495.

  The "Hawaiianness" of Same-Sex Adoption.  30 UH L.Rev. 517.

 

Case Notes

 

Generally.

  As this section does not establish the supremacy of the 1840Constitution over the current state constitution, or somehow render thedocuments concurrent, whether chapter 431 violated the 1840 Constitution wasimmaterial for purposes of defendant's conviction.  90 H. 130 (App.), 976 P.2d444.

  Article XII, §7 of the Hawaii constitution and/or thissection do not authorize for native Hawaiian grandparents any more visitationrights than §571-46(7) and §571-46.3 authorize for all grandparents, native andnon-native Hawaiian.  112 H. 113 (App.), 144 P.3d 561.

 

Background of statute; general principles.

  Prior to 1893, common law (usually) or civil law, notcontrary to Hawaiian law or usage, followed as reason and equity dictated (L1847, p 5; cc 1859, §§14, 823).  2 H. 209; 3 H. 90, 95; 3 H. 106, 112; 5 H.543; 6 H. 718, 725; 8 H. 77, 80; 13 H. 499, 505; 17 H. 393, 410; 27 H. 626; 27H. 671, 674; 31 H. 661, 669, reh'g denied 31 H. 796; 41 H. 634; 45 H. 373,383-84, 369 P.2d 96; 46 H. 425, 429, 380 P.2d 762.

  Effective January 1, 1893, common law adopted"except as otherwise provided..., or fixed by Hawaiian judicial precedent,or established by Hawaiian usage...."  Effect of Hawaiian judicialprecedent:  10 H. 421, 436; 16 H. 294, 303; 20 H. 146, 149; 25 H. 701, 708; 27H. 626, 628; 31 H. 661, 669, reh'g denied 31 H. 796; 38 H. 479, 481; 40 H. 92;45 H. 373, 383-84, 369 P.2d 96; 46 H. 425, 429, 380 P.2d 762; 49 H. 273, 414P.2d 925.  Statute gives Hawaiian decisions "the force of a statute". 25 H. 701, 708; 42 H. 518, 525.  Effect of Hawaiian usage:  10 H. 408(conveyance by lessor); 10 H. 421, 436 (conveyance by disseisee); 12 H. 375,391 (estates tail, fees simple conditional); 16 H. 377, 389, overruled onanother point 25 H. 397, 405, 21 H. 74, 83 (merger of estates); 18 H. 91, 96,aff'd 212 U.S. 208 (deed of release); 20 H. 146, 149 (whether agreement voidfor champerty); 24 H. 47, 57; 31 H. 376, 383; aff'd 52 F.2d 356 (water rights);49 H. 273, 414 P.2d 925 (adoption).

  Rejection, previous to 1893, of essential parts of common lawjustifies present rejection of other parts; and previous application (contraryto common law) of a general principle to one question justifies subsequentapplication to another question.  10 H. 421, 436; 12 H. 375, 380; 16 H. 615,628; 31 H. 661, 669, reh'g denied 31 H. 796; 40 H. 92; 45 H. 373, 384, 369 P.2d96.

  Court to consult both American and English decisions.  10 H.421, 434; 14 H. 554, 561; 18 H. 588, 591, aff'd 212 U.S. 208; 22 H. 140, 144;29 H. 571, 577; 30 H. 912, 938-43; 40 H. 86, 89; 49 H. 624, 629, 425 P.2d 1014.

  Statute adopting common law inapplicable where title alreadyvested.  13 H. 499, 500.  Applicability to construction of will alreadyprobated, raised but not decided. 12 H. 375, 379-80.

  This section continued in effect by Hawaiian Organic Act.  1U.S.D.C. Haw. 75, aff'd 114 F. 849; 305 U.S. 91, 108, aff'g 33 H. 34.

  Common law consists of principles, not set rules.  14 H. 554,561; 22 H. 140, 144; 39 H. 460, 466, aff'd 205 F.2d 616; 40 H. 86, 89; 41 H.106, 117-21; 42 H. 500.

  "Common law" adopted by this statute includesEnglish statutes, unless too recent.  16 H. 294, 303; 20 H. 447, 450; 22 H.140, 144; 40 H. 86, 89 (includes statutes passed before emigration of firstsettlers to America).  Includes statute of 13th Elizabeth governing fraudulentconveyances.  21 H. 1, 3; 39 H. 493, 496.  Includes rule against perpetuities. 18 H. 52, 69, aff'd 211 U.S. 321; 32 H. 323, 330; 34 H. 288, 293.

  This statute deemed to preclude adoption of modern rule.  22H. 140; 28 H. 275, 276; 36 H. 107, 110; see 25 H. 357, 371, aff'd 272 F. 856,questioned 49 H. 456, 487, 421 P.2d 550.  But other cases hold court notrequired to follow a rule based on reasons which no longer exist or conditionswhich do not obtain.  10 H. 408, 413; 10 H. 421, 436; 14 H. 554; 27 F.2d 582,rev'g 29 H. 770; 40 H. 86, 89; 41 H. 527, 552.  Not required to follow a rulerepugnant to the system established in Hawaii.  12 H. 375, 391.  May applyenlightened modern authorities.  29 H. 571, 577; 39 H. 460, 465, aff'd 205 F.2d616; 198 F. Supp. 78, 105-11, aff'd 304 F.2d 149.

  Applicability of common law in determining duties of publicofficers.  29 H. 83, denying reh'g of 29 H. 21; 42 H. 14.  Right to sue on bailbond.  19 H. 4, 7.

  Common law does not remain in sedentary state.  52 H. 40, 469P.2d 183.

  Rule against perpetuities is part of English common law.  52H. 40, 469 P.2d 183.

  Referred to:  16 H. 731, 733; 17 H. 566, 569; 19 H. 88, 93;19 H. 366, 375 (concurring opinion); 26 H. 699, 700; 27 H. 655, 659, aff'd 10F.2d 474, 477; 46 H. 197, 209, 377 P.2d 609; 69 F.2d 681, 682; 190 U.S. 197,217; 3 U.S.D.C. Haw. 176, 179; 238 F. Supp. 867.

 

Criminal law and procedure.

  See also notes under Effect of common law on statutoryconstruction.

  Practice of putting question why sentence should not bepronounced, not indispensable.  3 H. 106.

  No common law offenses.  4 H. 39; 10 H. 469, 472; 11 H. 293,300.

  Leave of court required for a nol. pros.  6 H. 718.

  Elements of offense where not defined, resort to common law. 25 H. 814.

  Appeal in mitigation fixed by Hawaiian judicial precedent. 38 H. 479, 481.

  Whether corroboration of accomplice required, governed bycommon law.  45 H. 16, 42, 361 P.2d 45.

  No common law offenses, and the applicable statute orordinance itself must provide a penalty.  62 H. 656, 619 P.2d 93.

 

Effect of common law on statutory construction.

  Torrens Act construed in light of common law.  256 F.2d 208,212, remanding 41 H. 490, modified 42 H. 661.

  Appellants' contention that native Hawaiian rights wereexclusive and possessory was unsupported in the law.  76 F.3d 280.

  If plaintiff could prove that its custom and usage of subjectland, prior to 1892, established its right of occupancy and use based upon thedoctrine of individual aboriginal title, then that doctrine, as established in1923, would apply.  Any aboriginal title that plaintiff may have had wasextinguished; plaintiff failed to show that its use and occupancy of the areawas exclusive as required by the doctrine.  875 F. Supp. 680.

  Plaintiff's claims of reserved rights of native tenants underHawaii law did not extend to the right of perpetual and exclusive occupancyupon the land of another; plaintiff's ancestors' failure to claim kuleana titleto subject land, which rendered them tenants at sufferance, foreclosedplaintiff's attempt to claim possessory rights to the land under Hawaii law. 875 F. Supp. 680.

  Statutes in derogation of common law strictly construed.  5H. 41; 9 H. 23, 25; 10 H. 151, 159; 22 H. 765, 767 (explaining earlier cases);23 H. 541, 545; 37 H. 374, 379 (ordinance); 37 H. 571, 580; 49 H. 624, 628, 425P.2d 1014; 50 H. 201, 436 P.2d 752.  But should nevertheless be construed inaccordance with legislative purpose.  41 H. 442, 459; 44 H. 59, 67, 352 P.2d335.

  Grounds for annulment held exclusively statutory.  8 H. 77.

  Interpretation of words in criminal statute according tocommon law meaning.  8 H. 259; 22 H. 618, 629; 33 H. 560, 563.

  Marriage controlled by statute, no common law marriage.  25H. 397.

  Usury statute as superseding common law.  36 H. 107.

  Statute codifying common law, interpreted according to moderndecisions.  39 H. 460, 465, aff'd 205 F.2d 616.

  Common law as background in applying statutes prescribingtime and place of trial.  46 H. 197, 209, note 4, 377 P.2d 728.

  The common law recognizes a cause of action for invasion ofright of privacy where defendant uses plaintiff's name or picture forcommercial purposes.  50 H. 374, 441 P.2d 141.

  Common law holds that right to rent to accrue on a lease ofreal property is an interest in realty.  Rent already due is personalty.  56 H.295, 535 P.2d 1109.

  Common law rule for use of ancient documents as evidenceconstrued.  57 H. 312, 555 P.2d 495.

  Joint owners of an animal may be liable in an action forinjuries caused by such animal.  57 H. 620, 562 P.2d 779.

  "Hawaiian usage" must predate November 25,1892.  58 H. 106, 566 P.2d 725.

  No evidence that "Hawaiian usage" gave to owner ofland along seashore title to lava extensions created by volcanic eruption. 58H. 106, 566 P.2d 725.

  Where practices have, without harm to anyone, been continued,reference to Hawaiian usage in section insures their continuance for so long asno actual harm is done thereby.  Retention of a Hawaiian tradition should ineach case be determined by balancing respective interests and harm once it isestablished that application of the custom has continued in a particular area. 66 H. 1, 656 P.2d 745.

  "Hawaiian usage" clause may establish certaincustomary Hawaiian rights beyond those found in §7-1.  73 H. 578, 837 P.2d1247.

  Common law rights ordinarily associated with tenancy do notlimit customary rights existing under the laws of Hawaii.  79 H. 425, 903 P.2d1246.

  Descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited islands priorto 1778 who assert valid customary and traditional Hawaiian rights under thissection entitled to protection regardless of their blood quantum.  79 H. 425,903 P.2d 1246.

  Hawaii constitution and this section require county planningcommission to "preserve and protect" reasonable exercise of customaryor traditional native Hawaiian rights to the extent feasible when issuingspecial management area use permits.  79 H. 425, 903 P.2d 1246.

  If property is deemed "fully developed", i.e.,lands zoned and used for residential purposes with existing dwellings,improvements, and infrastructure, it is always "inconsistent" topermit the practice of traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights on suchproperty.  89 H. 177, 970 P.2d 485.

  To establish the existence of a traditional or customarynative Hawaiian practice, there must be an adequate foundation in the recordconnecting the claimed right to a firmly rooted traditional or customary nativeHawaiian practice.  89 H. 177, 970 P.2d 485.

  Where defendant failed to adduce sufficient evidence tosupport claim of the exercise of a constitutionally protected native Hawaiianright and knowingly entered landowner's property which was fenced in a mannerto exclude others, trial court properly concluded that defendant was unlawfullyon property in violation of §708-814(1).  89 H. 177, 970 P.2d 485.

 

Judicial precedents prior to adoption of common law by thisstatute (with cases applying these precedents).

  Delivery of seisin obsolete.  1 H. 17.  Deed reserving lifeestate valid.  4 H. 515, 517; 5 H. 484.  Rule in Shelley's case rejected.  8 H.392; 12 H. 375, 389; 13 H. 196, 199; 19 H. 78.

  Seal not necessary to validity of instrument.  1 H. 23; 4 H.459; 6 H. 633 (single justice).  Applied as rendering of no force common lawdistinction between action of covenant and of assumpsit.  40 H. 92. Incontestability of sealed instrument for want of consideration raised but notdecided.  29 H. 548.

  Widow may recover for death of husband.  2 H. 209; 1 U.S.D.C.Haw. 75, aff'd 114 F. 849.  Applied as allowing action by father for death ofminor child.  16 H. 615, 628; 27 H. 671, 674; 31 H. 939; 37 H. 571.  But not asallowing action for death of adult child, 27 H. 626, or for injury to parentshort of death, 41 H. 634.  Applied as rejecting rule of Baker v. Bolton (1Camp. 493) that death of human being not an injury, so as to permit personalrepresentative to sue for lost earnings under survival statute (§663-7).  45 H.373, 369 P.2d 96.

  Rule that conveyance to two or more construed as jointtenancy, rejected.  5 H. 543; 8 H. 392, 396.  Precedent applied in case ofadverse holding by two or more.  31 H. 661, reh'g denied 31 H. 796.

  Survival of cause of action governed by common law in absenceof specific statute.  6 H. 556 (single justice); 34 H. 667.

  Grounds for annulment, held exclusively statutory.  8 H. 77.

  Estates tail and fees simple conditional rejected (withoutreliance on statutes prior to 1893).  12 H. 375, 391-4; 20 H. 372, 377; 21 H.699, aff'd 242 U.S. 612; 23 H. 747, 757, aff'd 255 F. 732; 25 H. 561, 567.

  Word "heirs" unnecessary to conveyance of a feesimple.  13 H. 499; 23 H. 38, 44, aff'd 242 F. 446; 23 H. 298, 304; 46 H. 425,429, 380 P.2d 762.

  Statute of uses is in force, the point having been settled asearly as 1855.  16 H. 294, 303.

  Common law doctrine of merger of estates rejected.  16 H.377, 388, overruled on another point 26 H. 405.

  Status of adopted child as "issue" in view ofHawaiian usage and precedents.  35 H. 104, aff'd 115 F.2d 956; 42 H. 640; 49 H.273, 414 P.2d 925.

  Hawaiian usage in establishing seaward boundaries.  50 H.314, 440 P.2d 76.

  Hawaiian usage mentioned is usage which predatedNov. 25, 1892.  52 H. 472, 479 P.2d 202.