Source: https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol13_Ch0601-0676/HRS0663/HRS_0663-0010_0009.HTM
Timestamp: 2018-11-19 01:02:11
Document Index: 303401516

Matched Legal Cases: ['§663', '§17', '§2', '§1', '§1', '§1', '§4', '§663']

§663-10.9 Abolition of joint and several liability; exceptions. Joint and several liability for joint tortfeasors as defined in section 663-11 is abolished except in the following circumstances:
(5) Provided, however, that joint and several liability for economic and noneconomic damages for claims against design professionals, as defined in chapter 672, and certified public accountants, as defined in chapter 466, is abolished in actions not involving physical injury or death to persons. [L Sp 1986, c 2, §17; am L 1989, c 300, §2; am L 1991, c 62, §1; am L 1993, c 238, §1; am L 1995, c 130, §1; am L 1999, c 237, §4]
Plaintiffs' negligence claim included the right to recover under an unmodified doctrine of joint and several liability, as at the time their claim accrued, §663-10.5 (2005) imposed joint and several liability for economic and noneconomic damages upon any jointly liable person; thus, because the legislature did not intend for Act 112, L 2006 to apply retroactively to divest the plaintiffs’ accrued or substantive rights, the trial court correctly concluded that Act 112 did not apply to the case. 117 H. 262, 178 P.3d 538 (2008).
In a class action against two hotel operators for the unlawful withholding of wages, circuit court erred in failing to apportion damages when it held the operators of one hotel jointly and severally liable for injuries to employees at another hotel that they did not operate. 133 H. 1, 323 P.3d 792 (2014).