§46-72  Liability for injuries or damages;
notice.  Before the county shall be liable for damages to any person for
injuries to person or property received upon any of the streets, avenues,
alleys, sidewalks, or other public places of the county, or on account of any
negligence of any official or employee of the county, the person injured, or
the owner or person entitled to the possession, occupation, or use of the
property injured, or someone on the person's behalf, within two years after the
injuries accrued shall give the individual identified in the respective
county's charter, or if none is specified, the chairperson of the council of
the county or the clerk of the county in which the injuries occurred, notice in
writing of the injuries and the specific damages resulting, stating fully when,
where, and how the injuries or damage occurred, the extent of the injuries or
damages, and the amount claimed. [L 1943, c 181, §1; RL 1945, §6013; RL 1955,
§138-21; HRS §46-72; am L 1998, c 124, §1; am L 2007, c 152, §8]



 



Cross References



 



  Use, repair, and maintenance of public roads in ownership
dispute, see §46-15.9.



 



Law Journals and Reviews



 



  The Requirement for Notice of Claim Against the City and
County of Honolulu:  Does it Apply to a Claim for Contribution Under the
Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act?  3 HBJ, May 1965, at 4.



 



Case Notes



 



  Presentation of claim against county within six month limit
was not condition precedent to maintaining third party action against county
for contribution under Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act.  283 F. Supp. 854.



  This is a statute of limitations and is to be narrowly
construed.  283 F. Supp. 854.



  Plaintiff's [chapters] 368 and 378 state law claims against
the county were time-barred under this section, where plaintiff never provided
the county written notice of plaintiff's claim.  504 F. Supp. 2d 969.



  Sufficiency of notice of claim discussed.  54 H. 210, 505
P.2d 1182.



  Notice of claim requirement is inconsistent with §662-4 and
is invalid.  55 H. 216, 517 P.2d 51; 56 H. 135, 531 P.2d 648.



  Because the city is neither the sovereign nor the surrogate
or alter ego of the sovereign, it is not entitled to sovereign immunity; thus,
it is subject to the State's tort laws in the same manner as any private
tortfeasor; as §657-13 governs classes of "personal" tort actions,
such as "damage to persons or property", the infancy tolling
provision of §657-13(1) applies directly to personal injury actions against the
city; child was thus able to bring action, but as §657-13(1) did not provide
for tolling of parents' derivative actions and they did not timely comply with
this section, their individual claims were barred.  104 H. 341, 90 P.3d 233.



  Counties do not fall within the ambit of the State Tort
Liability Act, chapter 662; this section is the statute of limitations
applicable to actions against the counties.  104 H. 341, 90 P.3d 233.



  The limitation period set forth in this section is not tolled
pending the appointment of a personal representative.  115 H. 1, 165 P.3d 247.



  The statute of limitations applicable to the estate's claims
arising out of decedent's injuries and the plaintiff's own derivative wrongful
death damages was this section; this section applies to claims against counties
arising from fatal injuries.  115 H. 1, 165 P.3d 247.



  Where this section (2006) created a class of tort claimants,
injured by the conduct of a county, who were subject to a six-month statute of
limitations period for filing their complaint, and victims of injuries caused
by the State under §662-4 had a two-year limitation period, and there was no
rational basis to support such disparate treatment, this section (2006) was
unconstitutional under article I, §5 of the Hawaii constitution.  115 H. 1, 165
P.3d 247.