reglab/statecodes huggingface dataset:
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658F. Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act › 658F-4 Standards for recognition of foreign-country judgment.

§658F-4 Standards for recognition of foreign-country judgment.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsections (b) and (c), a court of this State shall recognize a foreign-country judgment to which this chapter applies.
(b) A court of this State may not recognize a foreign-country judgment if:
(1) The judgment was rendered under a judicial system that does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with the requirements of due process of law;
(2) The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant; or
(3) The foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter.
(c) A court of this State need not recognize a foreign-country judgment if:
(1) The defendant in the proceeding in the foreign court did not receive notice of the proceeding in sufficient time to enable the defendant to defend;
(2) The judgment was obtained by fraud that deprived the losing party of an adequate opportunity to present its case;
(3) The judgment or the cause of action on which the judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of this State or of the United States;
(4) The judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive judgment;
(5) The proceeding in the foreign court was contrary to an agreement between the parties under which the dispute in question was to be determined otherwise than by proceedings in that foreign court;
(6) In the case of jurisdiction based only on personal service, the foreign court was a seriously inconvenient forum for the trial of the action;
(7) The judgment was rendered in circumstances that raise substantial doubt about the integrity of the rendering court with respect to the judgment; or
(8) The specific proceeding in the foreign court leading to the judgment was not compatible with the requirements of due process of law.
(d) A party resisting recognition of a foreign-country judgment has the burden of establishing that a ground for nonrecognition stated in subsection (b) or (c) exists. [L 2009, c 34, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658F. Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act › 658F-5 Personal jurisdiction.

§658F-5 Personal jurisdiction.
(a) A foreign-country judgment may not be refused recognition for lack of personal jurisdiction if:
(1) The defendant was served with process personally in the foreign country;
(2) The defendant voluntarily appeared in the proceeding, other than for the purpose of protecting property seized or threatened with seizure in the proceeding or of contesting the jurisdiction of the court over the defendant;
(3) The defendant, before the commencement of the proceeding, had agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of the foreign court with respect to the subject matter involved;
(4) The defendant was domiciled in the foreign country when the proceeding was instituted or was a corporation or other form of business organization that had its principal place of business in, or was organized under the laws of, the foreign country;
(5) The defendant had a business office in the foreign country and the proceeding in the foreign court involved a cause of action arising out of business done by the defendant through that office in the foreign country; or
(6) The defendant operated a motor vehicle or airplane in the foreign country and the proceeding involved a cause of action arising out of that operation.
(b) The list of bases for personal jurisdiction in subsection (a) is not exclusive. The courts of this State may recognize bases of personal jurisdiction other than those listed in subsection (a) as sufficient to support a foreign-country judgment. [L 2009, c 34, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658F. Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act › 658F-6 Procedure for recognition of foreign-country judgment.

§658F-6 Procedure for recognition of foreign-country judgment.
(a) If recognition of a foreign-country judgment is sought as an original matter, the issue of recognition shall be raised by filing an action seeking recognition of the foreign-country judgment.
(b) If recognition of a foreign-country judgment is sought in a pending action, the issue of recognition may be raised by counterclaim, cross-claim, or affirmative defense. [L 2009, c 34, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658F. Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act › 658F-7 Effect of recognition of foreign-country judgment.

§658F-7 Effect of recognition of foreign-country judgment.
If the court in a proceeding under section 658F-6 finds that the foreign-country judgment is entitled to recognition under this chapter then, to the extent that the foreign-country judgment grants or denies recovery of a sum of money, the foreign-country judgment is:
(1) Conclusive between the parties to the same extent as the judgment of a sister state entitled to full faith and credit in this State would be conclusive; and
(2) Enforceable in the same manner and to the same extent as a judgment rendered in this State. [L 2009, c 34, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658F. Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act › 658F-8 Stay of proceedings pending appeal of foreign-country judgment.

§658F-8 Stay of proceedings pending appeal of foreign-country judgment.
If a party establishes that an appeal from a foreign-country judgment is pending or will be taken, the court may stay any proceedings with regard to the foreign-country judgment until the appeal is concluded, the time for appeal expires, or the appellant has had sufficient time to prosecute the appeal and has failed to do so. [L 2009, c 34, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658F. Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act › 658F-9 Statute of limitations.

§658F-9 Statute of limitations.
An action to recognize a foreign-country judgment must be commenced within the earlier of the time during which the foreign-country judgment is effective in the foreign country or fifteen years from the date that the foreign-country judgment became effective in the foreign country. [L 2009, c 34, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658F. Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act › 658F-10 Saving clause.

§658F-10 Saving clause.
This chapter does not prevent the recognition under principles of comity or otherwise of a foreign-country judgment not within the scope of this chapter. [L 2009, c 34, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-3 Applicability.

§658G-3 Applicability.
This chapter applies to a collaborative law participation agreement that meets the requirements of section 658G-4 signed after July 1, 2012. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
Revision Note
"July 1, 2012" substituted for "the effective date of this chapter".
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-4 Collaborative law participation agreement; requirements.

§658G-4 Collaborative law participation agreement; requirements.
(a) A collaborative law participation agreement shall:
(1) Be in a record;
(2) Be signed by the parties;
(3) State the parties' intention to resolve a collaborative matter through a collaborative law process under this chapter;
(4) Describe the nature and scope of the matter;
(5) Identify the collaborative lawyer who represents each party in the process; and
(6) Contain a statement by each collaborative lawyer confirming the lawyer's representation of a party in the collaborative law process.
(b) Parties may agree to include in a collaborative law participation agreement additional provisions not inconsistent with this chapter. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-5 Beginning and concluding a collaborative law process.

§658G-5 Beginning and concluding a collaborative law process.
(a) A collaborative law process begins when the parties sign a collaborative law participation agreement.
(b) A tribunal may not order a party to participate in a collaborative law process over that party's objection.
(c) A collaborative law process is concluded by:
(1) The resolution of a collaborative matter as evidenced by a signed record;
(2) The resolution of a part of the collaborative matter, evidenced by a signed record, in which the parties agree that the remaining parts of the matter will not be resolved in the process; or
(3) The termination of the process.
(d) A collaborative law process terminates:
(1) When a party gives notice to other parties in a record that the process is ended; or
(2) When a party:
(A) Begins a proceeding related to a collaborative matter without the agreement of all parties; or
(B) In a pending proceeding related to the matter:
(i) Initiates a pleading, motion, order to show cause, or request for a conference with the tribunal;
(ii) Requests that the proceeding be put on the tribunal's active calendar; or
(iii) Takes similar action requiring notice to be sent to the parties; or
(3) Except as otherwise provided by subsection (e), when a party discharges a collaborative lawyer or a collaborative lawyer withdraws from further representation of a party.
(e) A party's collaborative lawyer shall give prompt notice to all other parties in a record of a discharge or withdrawal.
(f) A party may terminate a collaborative law process with or without cause.
(g) Notwithstanding the discharge or withdrawal of a collaborative lawyer, a collaborative law process continues, if not later than thirty days after the date that the notice of the discharge or withdrawal of a collaborative lawyer required by subsection (d)(3) is sent to the parties:
(1) The unrepresented party engages a successor collaborative lawyer; and
(2) In a signed record:
(A) The parties consent to continue the process by reaffirming the collaborative law participation agreement;
(B) The agreement is amended to identify the successor collaborative lawyer; and
(C) The successor collaborative lawyer confirms the lawyer's representation of a party in the collaborative process.
(h) A collaborative law process does not conclude if, with the consent of the parties, a party requests a tribunal to approve a resolution of the collaborative matter or any part thereof as evidenced by a signed record.
(i) A collaborative law participation agreement may provide additional methods of concluding a collaborative law process. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-6 Proceedings pending before tribunal; status report.

§658G-6 Proceedings pending before tribunal; status report.
(a) Persons in a proceeding pending before a tribunal may sign a collaborative law participation agreement to seek to resolve a collaborative matter related to the proceeding. The parties shall file promptly with the tribunal a notice of the agreement after it is signed. Subject to subsection (c) and sections 658G-7 and 658G-8, the filing operates as an application for a stay of the proceeding.
(b) The parties shall file promptly with the tribunal notice in a record when a collaborative law process concludes. The stay of the proceeding under subsection (a) is lifted when the notice is filed. The notice may not specify any reason for termination of the process.
(c) A tribunal in which a proceeding is stayed under subsection (a) may require the parties and collaborative lawyers to provide a status report on the collaborative law process and the proceeding. A status report may include only information on whether the process is ongoing or concluded. It may not include a report, assessment, evaluation, recommendation, finding, or other communication regarding a collaborative law process or collaborative law matter.
(d) A tribunal may not consider a communication made in violation of subsection (c).
(e) A tribunal shall provide parties notice and an opportunity to be heard before dismissing a proceeding in which a notice of collaborative process is filed based on delay or failure to prosecute. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-7 Emergency order.

§658G-7 Emergency order.
During a collaborative law process, a tribunal may issue emergency orders to protect the health, safety, welfare, or interest of a party or family or household member as defined in section 586-1. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-9 Disqualification of collaborative lawyer and lawyers in associated law firm.

§658G-9 Disqualification of collaborative lawyer and lawyers in associated law firm.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c), a collaborative lawyer is disqualified from appearing before a tribunal to represent a party in a proceeding related to the collaborative matter.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) and sections 658G-10 and 658G-11, a lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated is disqualified from appearing before a tribunal to represent a party in a proceeding related to the collaborative matter if the collaborative lawyer is disqualified from doing so under subsection (a).
(c) A collaborative lawyer or a lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated may represent a party:
(1) To ask a tribunal to approve an agreement resulting from the collaborative law process; or
(2) To seek or defend an emergency order to protect the health, safety, welfare, or interest of a party, or family or household member as defined in section 586-1 if a successor lawyer is not immediately available to represent that person. In that event, subsections (a) and (b) apply when the party, or family or household member is represented by a successor lawyer or reasonable measures are taken to protect the health, safety, welfare, or interest of that person. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-10 Low income parties.

§
658G-
10 Low income parties.
(a) The disqualification of section 658G-9(a) applies to a collaborative lawyer representing a party with or without fee.
(b) After a collaborative law process concludes, another lawyer in a law firm with which a collaborative lawyer disqualified under section 658G-9(a) is associated may represent a party without fee in the collaborative matter or a matter related to the collaborative matter if:
(1) The party has an annual income that qualifies the party for free legal representation under the criteria established by the law firm for free legal representation;
(2) The collaborative law participation agreement so provides; and
(3) The collaborative lawyer is isolated from any participation in the collaborative matter or a matter related to the collaborative matter through procedures within the law firm which are reasonably calculated to isolate the collaborative lawyer from that participation. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-11 Governmental entity as party.

§
658G-
11 Governmental entity as party.
(a) The disqualification of section 658G-9(a) applies to a collaborative lawyer representing a party that is a government or governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality.
(b) After a collaborative law process concludes, another lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated may represent a government or governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality in the collaborative matter or a matter related to the collaborative matter if:
(1) The collaborative law participation agreement so provides; and
(2) The collaborative lawyer is isolated from any participation in the collaborative matter or a matter related to the collaborative matter through procedures within the law firm which are reasonably calculated to isolate the collaborative lawyer from that participation. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-12 Disclosure of information.

§658G-12 Disclosure of information.
Except as provided by law other than this chapter, during the collaborative law process, on the request of another party, a party shall make timely, full, candid, and informal disclosure of information related to the collaborative matter without formal discovery. A party also shall update promptly previously disclosed information that has materially changed. The parties may define the scope of disclosure during the collaborative law process. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-13 Standards of professional responsibility and mandatory reporting not affected.

§658G-13 Standards of professional responsibility and mandatory reporting not affected.
This chapter does not affect:
(1) The professional responsibility obligations and standards applicable to a lawyer or other licensed professional; or
(2) The obligation of a person to report abuse or neglect, abandonment, or exploitation of a child or adult under the law of this State. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-14 Appropriateness of collaborative law process.

§
658G-
14 Appropriateness of collaborative law process.
Before a prospective party signs a collaborative law participation agreement, a prospective collaborative lawyer shall:
(1) Assess with the prospective party factors the lawyer reasonably believes relate to whether a collaborative law process is appropriate for the prospective party's matter;
(2) Provide the prospective party with information that the lawyer reasonably believes is sufficient for the party to make an informed decision about the material benefits and risks of a collaborative law process as compared to the material benefits and risks of other reasonably available alternatives for resolving the proposed collaborative matter, such as litigation, mediation, arbitration, or expert evaluation; and
(3) Advise the prospective party that:
(A) After signing an agreement if a party initiates a proceeding or seeks tribunal intervention in a pending proceeding related to the collaborative matter, the collaborative law process terminates;
(B) Participation in a collaborative law process is voluntary and any party has the right to terminate unilaterally a collaborative law process with or without cause; and
(C) The collaborative lawyer and any lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated may not appear before a tribunal to represent a party in a proceeding related to the collaborative matter, except as authorized by section 658G-9(c), 658G-10(b), or 658G-11(b). [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-15 Coercive or violent relationship.

§658G-15 Coercive or violent relationship.
(a) Before a prospective party signs a collaborative law participation agreement, a prospective collaborative lawyer shall make reasonable inquiry whether the prospective party has a history of a coercive or violent relationship with another prospective party.
(b) Throughout a collaborative law process, a collaborative lawyer reasonably and continuously shall assess whether the party the collaborative lawyer represents has a history of a coercive or violent relationship with another party.
(c) If a collaborative lawyer reasonably believes that the party the lawyer represents or the prospective party who consults the lawyer has a history of a coercive or violent relationship with another party or prospective party, the lawyer may not begin or continue a collaborative law process unless:
(1) The party or the prospective party requests beginning or continuing a process; and
(2) The collaborative lawyer reasonably believes that the safety of the party or prospective party can be protected adequately during a process. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-16 Confidentiality of collaborative law communication.

§658G-16 Confidentiality of collaborative law communication.
A collaborative law communication is confidential to the extent agreed by the parties in a signed record or as provided by law of this State other than this chapter. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-17 Privilege against disclosure for collaborative law communication; admissibility; discovery.

§
658G-
17 Privilege against disclosure for collaborative law communication; admissibility; discovery.
(a) Subject to sections 658G-18 and 658G-19, a collaborative law communication is privileged under subsection (b), is not subject to discovery, and is not admissible in evidence.
(b) In a proceeding, the following privileges apply:
(1) A party may refuse to disclose, and may prevent any other person from disclosing, a collaborative law communication.
(2) A nonparty participant may refuse to disclose, and may prevent any other person from disclosing, a collaborative law communication of the nonparty participant.
(c) Evidence or information that is otherwise admissible or subject to discovery does not become inadmissible or protected from discovery solely because of its disclosure or use in a collaborative law process. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-18 Waiver and preclusion of privilege.

§658G-18 Waiver and preclusion of privilege.
(a) A privilege under section 658G-17 may be waived in a record or orally during a proceeding if it is expressly waived by all parties and, in the case of the privilege of a nonparty participant, it is also expressly waived by the nonparty participant.
(b) A person that makes a disclosure or representation about a collaborative law communication which prejudices another person in a proceeding may not assert a privilege under section 658G-17, but this preclusion applies only to the extent necessary for the person prejudiced to respond to the disclosure or representation. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-19 Limits of privilege.

§658G-19 Limits of privilege.
(a) There is no privilege under section 658G-17 for a collaborative law communication that is:
(1) Available to the public under chapter 92 or made during a session of a collaborative law process that is open, or is required by law to be open, to the public;
(2) A threat or statement of a plan to inflict bodily injury or commit a crime of violence;
(3) Intentionally used to plan a crime, commit or attempt to commit a crime, or conceal an ongoing crime or ongoing criminal activity; or
(4) In an agreement resulting from the collaborative law process, evidenced by a record signed by all parties to the agreement.
(b) The privilege under section 658G-17 for a collaborative law communication does not apply to the extent that a communication is:
(1) Sought or offered to prove or disprove a claim or complaint of professional misconduct or malpractice arising from or related to a collaborative law process; or
(2) Sought or offered to prove or disprove abuse, neglect, abandonment, or exploitation of a child or adult, unless the agencies of the department of human services responsible for child protective services or adult protective services is a party to or otherwise participates in the process.
(c) There is no privilege under section 658G-17 if a tribunal finds, after a hearing in camera, that the party seeking discovery or the proponent of the evidence has shown the evidence is not otherwise available, the need for the evidence substantially outweighs the interest in protecting confidentiality, and the collaborative law communication is sought or offered in:
(1) A court proceeding involving a felony or misdemeanor; or
(2) A proceeding seeking rescission or reformation of a contract arising out of the collaborative law process or in which a defense to avoid liability on the contract is asserted.
(d) If a collaborative law communication is subject to an exception under subsection (b) or (c), only the part of the communication necessary for the application of the exception may be disclosed or admitted.
(e) Disclosure or admission of evidence excepted from the privilege under subsection (b) or (c) does not make the evidence or any other collaborative law communication discoverable or admissible for any other purpose.
(f) The privileges under section 658G-17 do not apply if the parties agree in advance in a signed record, or if a record of a proceeding reflects agreement by the parties, that all or part of a collaborative law process is not privileged. This subsection does not apply to a collaborative law communication made by a person that did not receive actual notice of the agreement before the communication was made. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-20 Authority of tribunal in case of noncompliance.

§658G-20 Authority of tribunal in case of noncompliance.
(a)
If an agreement fails to meet the requirements of section 658G-4, or a lawyer fails to comply with section 658G-14 or 658G-15, a tribunal may nonetheless find that the parties intended to enter into a collaborative law participation agreement if they:
(1) Signed a record indicating an intention to enter into a collaborative law participation agreement; and
(2) Reasonably believed they were participating in a collaborative law process.
(b) If a tribunal makes the findings specified in subsection (a), and the interests of justice require, the tribunal may:
(1) Enforce an agreement evidenced by a record resulting from the process in which the parties participated;
(2) Apply the disqualification provisions of sections 658G-5, 658G-6, 658G-9, 658G-10, and 658G-11; and
(3) Apply the privilege under section 658G-17. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-21 Uniformity of application and construction.

§
658G-
21 Uniformity of application and construction.
In applying and construing this uniform act, consideration must be given to the need to promote uniformity of the law with respect to its subject matter among states that enact it. [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658G. Hawaii Uniform Collaborative Law Act › 658G-22 Relation to Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act.

§658G-22 Relation to Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act.
This chapter modifies, limits, and supersedes the federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, 15 U.S.C. section 7001 et seq., but does not modify, limit, or supersede section 101(c) of that Act, 15 U.S.C.A. section 7001(c), or authorize electronic delivery of any of the notices described in section 103(b) of that Act, 15 U.S.C.A. section 7003(b). [L 2012, c 207, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-2 Definitions.

§658H-2 Definitions.
In this chapter:
"International commercial mediation" means a process, whether referred to by the expression conciliation, mediation, or similar expression, whereby parties:
(1) To an agreement to conciliation have, at the time of the conclusion of that agreement, their places of business in different countries; or
(2) Who have their places of business in a country that is different from either the country in which a substantial part of the obligations of the commercial relationship is to be performed or the country with which the subject matter of the dispute is mostly closely connected,
request a third person or persons, who do not have the authority to impose upon the parties a solution to the dispute, to assist them in their attempt to reach an amicable settlement of their dispute arising out of or relating to a contractual or other legal relationship.
"Mediation" means a process in which a mediator facilitates communication and negotiation between parties to assist them in reaching a voluntary agreement regarding their dispute.
"Mediation communication" means a statement, whether oral, in a record, verbal, or nonverbal, that occurs during a mediation or is made for purposes of considering, conducting, participating in, initiating, continuing, or reconvening a mediation or retaining a mediator.
"Mediation party" means a person who participates in a mediation and whose agreement is necessary to resolve the dispute.
"Mediator" means an individual who conducts a mediation.
"Model law" means the Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on June 24, 2002, and recommended by the United Nations General Assembly in a resolution (A/RES/57/18) dated November 19, 2002.
"Nonparty participant" means a person, other than a party or mediator, who participates in a mediation.
"Person" means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, or government; governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality; public corporation; or any other legal or commercial entity.
"Proceeding" means:
(1) A judicial, administrative, arbitral, or other adjudicative process, including related pre-hearing and post-hearing motions, conferences, and discovery; or
(2) A legislative hearing or similar process.
"Record" means information that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an electronic or other medium and is retrievable in perceivable form.
"Sign" means to:
(1) Execute or adopt a tangible symbol with the present intent to authenticate a record; or
(2) Attach or logically associate an electronic symbol, sound, or process to or with a record with the present intent to authenticate a record. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-3 Scope.

§658H-3 Scope.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) or (c), this chapter applies to a mediation in which:
(1) The mediation parties are required to mediate by statute or court or administrative rule or referred to mediation by a court, administrative agency, or arbitrator;
(2) The mediation parties and the mediator agree to mediate in a record that demonstrates an expectation that mediation communications will be privileged against disclosure; or
(3) The mediation parties use as a mediator an individual who holds himself or herself out as a mediator or the mediation is provided by a person who holds himself or herself out as providing mediation.
(b) This chapter shall not apply to a mediation:
(1) Relating to the establishment, negotiation, administration, or termination of a collective bargaining relationship;
(2) Relating to a dispute that is pending under or is part of the processes established by a collective bargaining agreement, except that this chapter shall apply to a mediation arising out of a dispute that has been filed with an administrative agency or court;
(3) Conducted by a judge on a case; or
(4) Conducted under the auspices of:
(A) A primary or secondary school if all the mediation parties are students; or
(B) A correctional institution for youths if all the mediation parties are residents of that institution.
(c) If the mediation parties agree in advance in a signed record, or a record of proceeding reflects agreement by the mediation parties, that all or part of a mediation is not privileged, the privileges under sections 658H-4 through 658H-6 shall not apply to the mediation or part agreed upon. However, sections 658H-4 through 658H-6 shall apply to a mediation communication made by a person that has not received actual notice of the agreement before the mediation communication is made. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1; am L 2014, c 5, §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-4 Privilege against disclosure; admissibility; discovery.

§658H-4 Privilege against disclosure; admissibility; discovery.
(a) Except as provided in section 658H-6, a mediation communication is privileged as provided in subsection (b) and is not subject to discovery or admissible in evidence in a proceeding unless waived or precluded as provided by section 658H-5.
(b) In a proceeding, the following privileges apply:
(1) A mediation party may refuse to disclose and may prevent any other person from disclosing a mediation communication;
(2) A mediator may refuse to disclose a mediation communication, and may prevent any other person from disclosing a mediation communication of the mediator; and
(3) A nonparty participant may refuse to disclose, and may prevent any other person from disclosing, a mediation communication of the nonparty participant.
(c) Evidence or information that is otherwise admissible or subject to discovery does not become inadmissible or protected from discovery solely by reason of its disclosure or use in a mediation. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-5 Waiver and preclusion of privilege.

§658H-5 Waiver and preclusion of privilege.
(a) A privilege under section 658H-4 may be waived in a record or orally during a proceeding if it is expressly waived by all parties to the mediation and:
(1) In the case of the privilege of a mediator, it is expressly waived by the mediator; and
(2)
In the case of the privilege of a nonparty participant, it is expressly waived by the nonparty participant.
(b) A person who discloses or makes a representation about a mediation communication that prejudices another person in a proceeding is precluded from asserting a privilege under section 658H-4, but only to the extent necessary for the person prejudiced to respond to the representation or disclosure.
(c) A person who intentionally uses a mediation to plan, attempt to commit or commit a crime, or to conceal an ongoing crime or ongoing criminal activity is precluded from asserting a privilege under section 658H-4. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-6 Exceptions to privilege.

§658H-6 Exceptions to privilege.
(a) There is no privilege under section 658H-4 for a mediation communication that is:
(1) In an agreement evidenced by a record signed by all parties to the agreement;
(2) Available to the public under chapter 92F or made during a session of a mediation that is open, or is required by law to be open, to the public;
(3) A threat or statement of a plan to inflict bodily injury or commit a crime of violence;
(4) Intentionally used to plan a crime, attempt to commit or commit a crime, or to conceal an ongoing crime or ongoing criminal activity;
(5) Sought or offered to prove or disprove a claim or complaint of professional misconduct or malpractice filed against a mediator;
(6) Except as provided in subsection (c), sought or offered to prove or disprove a claim or complaint of professional misconduct or malpractice filed against a mediation party, nonparty participant, or representative of a party based on conduct occurring during a mediation; or
(7) Sought or offered to prove or disprove abuse, neglect, abandonment, or exploitation in a proceeding in which a child or adult protective services agency is a party, unless the department of human services participates in the mediation.
(b) There is no privilege under section 658H-4 if a court, administrative agency, or arbitrator finds, after a hearing in camera, that the party seeking discovery or the proponent of the evidence has shown that the evidence is not otherwise available, that there is a need for the evidence that substantially outweighs the interest in protecting confidentiality, and that the mediation communication is sought or offered in:
(1) A court proceeding involving a felony or misdemeanor; or
(2) Except as provided in subsection (c), a proceeding to prove a claim to rescind or reform, or a defense to avoid, liability on a contract arising out of the mediation.
(c) A mediator shall not be compelled to provide evidence of a mediation communication referred to in subsection (a)(6) or (b)(2).
(d) If a mediation communication is not privileged under subsection (a) or (b), only the portion of the mediation communication necessary for the application of the exception from nondisclosure may be admitted. Admission of evidence under subsection (a) or (b) does not render the evidence, or any other mediation communication, discoverable or admissible for any other purpose. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-7 Prohibited mediator reports.

§658H-7 Prohibited mediator reports.
(a) Except as agreed to in writing by the parties or as permitted in subsection (b), a mediator shall not make a report, assessment, evaluation, recommendation, finding, or other communication regarding a mediation to a court, administrative agency, or other authority that may make a ruling on the dispute that is the subject of the mediation.
(b) A mediator may disclose:
(1) Whether a mediation occurred or has terminated, whether a settlement was reached, and attendance at the mediation;
(2) Mediation communication as permitted under section 658H-6; or
(3) A mediation communication evidencing abuse, neglect, abandonment, or exploitation of an individual to a public agency responsible for protecting individuals against such mistreatment, except as prohibited under section 658H-6(a)(7).
(c) A report, assessment, evaluation, recommendation, finding, or other communication made in violation of subsection (a) shall not be considered by a court, administrative agency, or arbitrator. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-8 Confidentiality.

§658H-8 Confidentiality.
Unless subject to disclosure pursuant to part I of chapter 92 or chapter 92F, mediation communications are confidential to the extent agreed by the mediation parties or provided by other law or rule of this State. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-9 Mediator's disclosure of conflicts of interest; background.

§658H-9 Mediator's disclosure of conflicts of interest; background.
(a) Before accepting a mediation, an individual who is requested to serve as a mediator shall:
(1) Make an inquiry that is reasonable under the circumstances to determine whether there are any known facts that a reasonable individual would consider likely to affect the impartiality of the mediator, including a financial or personal interest in the outcome of the mediation and an existing or past relationship with a mediation party or foreseeable mediation party or nonparty participant in the mediation; and
(2) Disclose any such known fact to the mediation parties as soon as is practical before accepting a mediation.
(b) If a mediator learns any fact described in subsection (a)(1) after accepting a mediation, the mediator shall disclose it as soon as is practicable.
(c) At the request of a mediation party, an individual who is requested to serve as a mediator shall disclose the mediator's qualifications to mediate a dispute.
(d) A person who violates subsection (a) or (b) is precluded by the violation from asserting a privilege under section 658H-4.
(e) Subsections (a), (b), and (c) do not apply to an individual acting as a judge.
(f) This chapter does not require that a mediator have a special qualification by background or profession. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-10 Participation in mediation.

§658H-10 Participation in mediation.
An attorney or other individual designated by a party may accompany the party to and participate in a mediation. A waiver of participation given before the mediation may be rescinded. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-11 International commercial mediation.

§658H-11 International commercial mediation.
(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), if a mediation is an international commercial mediation, the mediation is governed by the model law.
(b) Unless the mediation parties agree in accordance with section 658H-3(c) that all or part of an international commercial mediation is not privileged, sections 658H-4, 658H-5, and 658H-6 and any applicable definitions in section 658H-2 also apply to the mediation and nothing in article 10 of the model law derogates from sections 658H-4, 658H-5, and 658H-6.
(c) If the parties to an international commercial mediation agree under article 1, subsection 7, of the model law that the model law does not apply, this chapter applies in its [entirety]. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-12 Relation to Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act.

§658H-12 Relation to Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act.
This chapter modifies, limits, or supersedes the federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, 15 United States Code section 7001 et seq.; provided that this chapter shall not modify, limit, or supersede section 101(c) of that Act or authorize electronic delivery of any of the notices described in section 103(b) of that Act. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 658H. Uniform Mediation Act › 658H-13 Application to existing agreements or referrals.

§658H-13 Application to existing agreements or referrals.
(a) This chapter shall govern a mediation pursuant to a referral for mediation or an agreement to mediate made on or after July 1, 2013.
(b) On or after January 1, 2014, this chapter shall govern an agreement to mediate whenever made. [L 2013, c 284, pt of §1]
Case Notes
The Hawaii Arbitration Act did not apply to plaintiff's counsel's communications. Subsection (a) barred the application of the Act because it was undisputed that the mediation at issue was based on an agreement to mediate in a July 2009 settlement. Under subsection (b), the Act could apply to a mediation between the parties, based on a July 2009 agreement, occurring after January 1, 2014, but the mediation at issue occurred nearly four years earlier. 40 F. Supp. 3d 1312 (2014).
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 659. Quo Warranto › 659-1 Definition.

§659-1 Definition.
This is an order issuing in the name of the State by a circuit court and directed to a person who claims or usurps an office of the State or of any subdivision thereof, or of any corporation or quasi-corporation, public or private, or any franchise, inquiring by what authority the person claims the office or franchise. [L 1876, c 39, §36; am L 1907, c 39, §1; RL 1925, §2716; RL 1935, §4258; RL 1945, §10279; RL 1955, §236-19; HRS §659-46; am L 1972, c 90, §3(a); ren HRS §659-1; gen ch 1985]
Case Notes
Will not lie to remove manager of plantation. 5 H. 3 (1883).
Writ to contest fire department election denied where by law members of a certain board are judges of validity of election. 8 H. 67 (1890).
Pleadings and practice, prior to adoption of Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure. 11 H. 22, 29 (1897); 22 H. 385 (1914).
Will lie to oust corporation officers illegally elected and in office unlawfully. 11 H. 22, 28 (1897); 22 H. 604 (1915); 28 H. 476 (1925); 34 H. 897 (1939).
Writ must issue in the name of the sovereign. 11 H. 22, 29 (1897).
To try title to office. 22 H. 381, 383 (1914); 34 H. 12 (1936); 39 H. 431 (1952); 41 H. 1 (1955).
Cited: 133 H. 229 (App.), 325 P.3d 641 (2014).
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 659. Quo Warranto › 659-2 Against corporations, by attorney general.

§659-2 Against corporations, by attorney general.
It may also be granted upon the application of the attorney general against individuals acting as a corporation without being legally incorporated. [L 1876, c 39, §37; RL 1925, §2717; RL 1935, §4259; RL 1945, §10280; RL 1955, §236-20; HRS §659-47; am L 1972, c 90, §3(b); ren HRS §659-2]
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 659. Quo Warranto › 659-3 Forfeiture of franchise.

§659-3 Forfeiture of franchise.
The several circuit courts shall have jurisdiction of all proceedings in, or in the nature of, quo warranto, brought by or in the name of the public utilities commission, or the State, for the forfeiture of the franchise of any corporate body offending against any law relating to such corporation, for misuser, for nonuser, for doing or committing any act or acts amounting to a surrender of its charter and for exercising rights not conferred upon it. [L 1972, c 90, §3(c); HRS §659-47.5; ren HRS §659-3]
Attorney General Opinions
Quo warranto action may be brought to enforce "resign to run" law. Att. Gen. Op. 86-4.
2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 36. Civil Remedies and Defenses and Special Proceedings › 659. Quo Warranto › 659-4 Petition.

§659-4 Petition.
The order is obtained by petition addressed to a circuit court, setting out facts sufficient to show a right to the order, and sworn to if the application is made by a private individual, or is made by the attorney general as provided by section 659-6. [L 1876, c 39, §38; RL 1925, §2718; RL 1935, §4260; RL 1945, §10281; RL 1955, §236-21; HRS §659-48; am L 1972, c 90, §3(d); ren HRS §659-4]
Case Notes
Sufficiency of petition. 17 H. 9 (1905); 22 H. 385, 387 (1914).
Private individual is a proper party to apply for writ. 39 H. 431 (1952).
Appellant's petition sufficiently stated that appellant was a resident, taxpayer, and qualified voter of Maui County, thus establishing appellant's standing to bring petition. 74 H. 394, 846 P.2d 894 (1993).