exculpatory clause in Hawaii

2006Finally, as a result of the transaction, the person or property of the purchaser is placed under the control of the seller of the service, subject to the risk of carelessness by the seller or his agents. 4 Haw.App. at 199 , 664 P.2d at 744 (finding under this test that the exculpatory clause contained in a contract for marine surveying was permissible) (brackets omitted) (quoting Lynch v. Santa Fe Nat’l Bank, 97 N.M. 554 , 627 P.2d 1247 , 1251-52 (N.M.Ct.App.1981) (holding that services of escrow agents in New Mexico were not in the nature of a public service so as to render an exculpatory cla

2006Finally, as a result of the transaction, the person or property of the purchaser is placed under the control of the seller of the service, subject to the risk of carelessness by the seller or his agents. 4 Haw.App. at 199 , 664 P.2d at 744 (finding under this test that the exculpatory clause contained in a contract for marine surveying was permissible) (brackets omitted) (quoting Lynch v. Santa Fe Nat’l Bank, 97 N.M. 554 , 627 P.2d 1247 , 1251-52 (N.M.Ct.App.1981) (holding that services of escrow agents in New Mexico were not in the nature of a public service so as to render an exculpatory cla

2020Fujimoto, 95 Hawaii at 156, 158, 19 P.3d at 739, 741 (holding that “the statute must take precedence over the terms of the contract” where an exculpatory clause was in direct conflict with a statute).

2006Fujimoto , 95 Hawai`i at 156, 19 P.3d at 739 (quoting Andrews, 823 F.Supp. at 378 ); see also Wheelock, 839 F.Supp. at 736 (interpreting the reasoning in Krohnert to conclude that to allow an exculpatory clause to extend to gross negligence would violate *440 the public interest, rendering the clause void).

2020In Bowers v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc., we addressed an “escape clause,” which is akin to an exculpatory clause, that attempted to alter the liability scheme established by a statute. 88 Hawaii 274, 275, 965 P.2d 1274, 1275 (1998).

2013Cf. Sylvia v. Johnson, 44 Mass.App.Ct. 483 , 691 N.E.2d 608, 609 (1998) ("Ordinarily, an exculpatory clause releases a party from his wrongful acts” whereas “[a] nonrecourse clause, on the other hand, ordinarily creates a limitation on personal liability.”) (Citing Black’s Law Dictionary 566, 1057 (6th ed.1990)).

2013Cf. Sylvia v. Johnson, 44 Mass.App.Ct. 483 , 691 N.E.2d 608, 609 (1998) ("Ordinarily, an exculpatory clause releases a party from his wrongful acts” whereas “[a] nonrecourse clause, on the other hand, ordinarily creates a limitation on personal liability.”) (Citing Black’s Law Dictionary 566, 1057 (6th ed.1990)).

2013See Zimmerman v. Northfield Real Estate, Inc., 156 Ill.App.3d 154 , 109 Ill.Dec. 541 , 510 N.E.2d 409, 415 (1986) (“An exculpatory clause cannot protect persons from the results of their wilful and wanton misconduct.

2013See Zimmerman v. Northfield Real Estate, Inc., 156 Ill.App.3d 154 , 109 Ill.Dec. 541 , 510 N.E.2d 409, 415 (1986) (“An exculpatory clause cannot protect persons from the results of their wilful and wanton misconduct.

2013See Alack v. Vic Tanny Int’l of Missouri, Inc., 923 S.W.2d 330, 337 (Mo.1996) (explaining that “there is no question that one may never exonerate oneself from future liability for intentional torts or for gross negligence, or for activities involving the public interest” (citations omitted)); Kellums v. Freight Sales Ctrs., Inc., 467 So.2d 816, 817 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1985) (“A party may by an exculpatory clause, absolve itself of liability for negligence, but an attempt to absolve itself from liability for an intentional tort is against public policy.” (Citations omitted.)); see also 8 S. Willis

2013See Alack v. Vic Tanny Int’l of Missouri, Inc., 923 S.W.2d 330, 337 (Mo.1996) (explaining that “there is no question that one may never exonerate oneself from future liability for intentional torts or for gross negligence, or for activities involving the public interest” (citations omitted)); Kellums v. Freight Sales Ctrs., Inc., 467 So.2d 816, 817 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1985) (“A party may by an exculpatory clause, absolve itself of liability for negligence, but an attempt to absolve itself from liability for an intentional tort is against public policy.” (Citations omitted.)); see also 8 S. Willis

2013Dominici v. Between the Bridges Marina, 375 F.Supp.2d 62, 68 (D.Conn.2005).

2006Finally, as a result of the transaction, the person or property of the purchaser is placed under the control of the seller of the service, subject to the risk of carelessness by the seller or his agents. 4 Haw.App. at 199 , 664 P.2d at 744 (finding under this test that the exculpatory clause contained in a contract for marine surveying was permissible) (brackets omitted) (quoting Lynch v. Santa Fe Nat’l Bank, 97 N.M. 554 , 627 P.2d 1247 , 1251-52 (N.M.Ct.App.1981) (holding that services of escrow agents in New Mexico were not in the nature of a public service so as to render an exculpatory cla

2006Finally, as a result of the transaction, the person or property of the purchaser is placed under the control of the seller of the service, subject to the risk of carelessness by the seller or his agents. 4 Haw.App. at 199 , 664 P.2d at 744 (finding under this test that the exculpatory clause contained in a contract for marine surveying was permissible) (brackets omitted) (quoting Lynch v. Santa Fe Nat’l Bank, 97 N.M. 554 , 627 P.2d 1247 , 1251-52 (N.M.Ct.App.1981) (holding that services of escrow agents in New Mexico were not in the nature of a public service so as to render an exculpatory cla

2006Finally, as a result of the transaction, the person or property of the purchaser is placed under the control of the seller of the service, subject to the risk of carelessness by the seller or his agents. 4 Haw.App. at 199 , 664 P.2d at 744 (finding under this test that the exculpatory clause contained in a contract for marine surveying was permissible) (brackets omitted) (quoting Lynch v. Santa Fe Nat’l Bank, 97 N.M. 554 , 627 P.2d 1247 , 1251-52 (N.M.Ct.App.1981) (holding that services of escrow agents in New Mexico were not in the nature of a public service so as to render an exculpatory cla

2006Finally, as a result of the transaction, the person or property of the purchaser is placed under the control of the seller of the service, subject to the risk of carelessness by the seller or his agents. 4 Haw.App. at 199 , 664 P.2d at 744 (finding under this test that the exculpatory clause contained in a contract for marine surveying was permissible) (brackets omitted) (quoting Lynch v. Santa Fe Nat’l Bank, 97 N.M. 554 , 627 P.2d 1247 , 1251-52 (N.M.Ct.App.1981) (holding that services of escrow agents in New Mexico were not in the nature of a public service so as to render an exculpatory cla

2006Auth. of Walker, Dade & Catoosa Counties, 160 Ga.App. 387 , 287 S.E.2d 99, 101 (1981); Belshaw v. Feinstein, 258 Cal.App.2d 711 , 65 Cal.Rptr. 788, 798 (1968).

2006Auth. of Walker, Dade & Catoosa Counties, 160 Ga.App. 387 , 287 S.E.2d 99, 101 (1981); Belshaw v. Feinstein, 258 Cal.App.2d 711 , 65 Cal.Rptr. 788, 798 (1968).

2006Fujimoto, 95 Hawai'i at 156 , 19 P.3d at 739 (quoting Andrews, 823 F.Supp. at 378 ); see also Wheelock, 839 F.Supp. at 736 (interpreting the reasoning in Krohnert to conclude that to allow an exculpatory clause to extend to gross negligence would violate the public interest, rendering the clause void).

2006Fujimoto , 95 Hawai`i at 156, 19 P.3d at 739 (quoting Andrews, 823 F.Supp. at 378 ); see also Wheelock, 839 F.Supp. at 736 (interpreting the reasoning in Krohnert to conclude that to allow an exculpatory clause to extend to gross negligence would violate *440 the public interest, rendering the clause void).

2006Auth. of Walker, Dade & Catoosa Counties, 160 Ga.App. 387 , 287 S.E.2d 99, 101 (1981); Belshaw v. Feinstein, 258 Cal.App.2d 711 , 65 Cal.Rptr. 788, 798 (1968).

2006Auth. of Walker, Dade & Catoosa Counties, 160 Ga.App. 387 , 287 S.E.2d 99, 101 (1981); Belshaw v. Feinstein, 258 Cal.App.2d 711 , 65 Cal.Rptr. 788, 798 (1968).

2001Cf. Taylor, 90 Hawai'i at 307 , 978 P.2d at 745 (1999) (“[B]ecause insurance policies are contracts of adhesion and are premised on standard forms prepared by the insurer’s attorneys, we have long subscribed to the principle that they must be construed liberally in favor of the insured and any ambiguities must be resolved against the insurer. ...

2001Cf. Taylor, 90 Hawai'i at 307 , 978 P.2d at 745 (1999) (“[B]ecause insurance policies are contracts of adhesion and are premised on standard forms prepared by the insurer’s attorneys, we have long subscribed to the principle that they must be construed liberally in favor of the insured and any ambiguities must be resolved against the insurer. ...

2001The ultimate determination of what constitutes the public interest must be made considering the totality of the circumstances of any given case against the backdrop of current societal expectations.” (Citations omitted.)); Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis.2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60, 62 (1996) (“Exculpatory contracts are not favored by the law because they tend to allow conduct below the acceptable standard of care....

2001The ultimate determination of what constitutes the public interest must be made considering the totality of the circumstances of any given case against the backdrop of current societal expectations.” (Citations omitted.)); Yauger v. Skiing Enterprises, Inc., 206 Wis.2d 76 , 557 N.W.2d 60, 62 (1996) (“Exculpatory contracts are not favored by the law because they tend to allow conduct below the acceptable standard of care....

2001“As a general rule, the construction and legal effect to be given a contract is a question of law freely reviewable by an appellate court.” Brown v. KFC Nat’l Management Co., 82 Hawai'i 226, 239 , 921 P.2d 146, 159 (1996) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted).

2001“As a general rule, the construction and legal effect to be given a contract is a question of law freely reviewable by an appellate court.” Brown v. KFC Nat’l Management Co., 82 Hawai'i 226, 239 , 921 P.2d 146, 159 (1996) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted).

1975“There is no principle of law better settled than that a surety has the right to stand upon the very terms of his contract.” Territory v. Pacific Coast Casualty Co., 22 Haw. 446, 450 (1915). 3 *199 The court found that the work undertaken by the surety through the contractors it employed, was completed within a reasonable time.