Hawaii Revised Statutes
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 1-21 (2026)
"Oath"
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§1-21 "Oath". The word "oath" includes a solemn affirmation. [CC 1859, §19; RL 1925, §18; RL 1935, §19; RL 1945, §18; RL 1955, §1-26; HRS §1-21; am L 1973, c 31, §1]
Cross References
Constitutional provisions, see Const. art. I, §7 and art. XVI, §4.
Right to affirm instead of swear on grounds of religious belief, see §621-12.
Rules of Court
See HRCP rule 43(d); HRPP rule 6(h); DCRCP rule 43(d).
Case Notes
Judicial oath in common use is legal oath. 8 H. 259.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1958–2008 · leading case: E & J Lounge Operating Co. v. Liquor Comm'n of Honolulu, 189 P.3d 432 (Haw. 2008).
E & J Lounge Operating Co. v. Liquor Comm'n of Honolulu, 189 P.3d 432 (Haw. 2008). “As the dissenting opinion elucidated, a review of the associated House Committee Report demonstrates that the legislature specifically intended the provisions of that chapter to apply to liquor license application denials as follows: The [Commission] raised the question whether…”
E & J Lounge Operating Co. v. Liquor Comm'n of Honolulu, 174 P.3d 367 (Haw. App. 2007). “Act 103, §§ 1-21 at 85-91. The structure of HAPA was based on the Revised 1961 Model State Administrative Procedure Act (1961 Model APA), which was developed at the meeting of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (USL Commission) on August 17-22, 1959.”
State v. Tamanaha, 379 P.2d 592 (Haw. 1963). “The offense in question was committed October 25, 1961, after the taking effect of the 1961 statute.”
State v. Taylor, 425 P.2d 1014 (Haw. 1967). “1955, § 1-21, provides that laws in pari materia shall be construed with reference to each other, and that: “What is clear in one statute may be called in aid to explain what is doubtful in.”
Mossman v. Haw'n Tr. Co., Ltd., 361 P.2d 374 (Haw. 1961). “1955, § 1-21. The distinction is between a writing which integrates the contract and thus constitutes the contract, on the one hand, and a written memorandum which merely evidences it, on the other.”
State v. Wong, 389 P.2d 439 (Haw. 1964). “At all events, after consideration of sections 258-36 and 258-37 and section 1-21, relating to the construction of statutes in pari materia, we have concluded that the nolle prosequi provided for by section 258-36, when entered, has the usual consequence of terminating the…”
Albert v. Dietz, 283 F. Supp. 854 (D. Haw. 1968). “Section 1-21 R.L.H. 1955; Territory v. Akase, 43 Haw.”
Cammack v. Waihee, 673 F. Supp. 1524 (D. Haw. 1987). “This conclusion is further buttressed by an examination of a schedule of Hawaii’s legal holidays as they existed before the enactment of the statute which established Good Friday as a legal holiday: Month # of Holidays January 1 February 1 March 0 April 0 May 1 June 1 July 1…”
State v. Heirs of Kapahi, 437 P.2d 321 (Haw. 1968). “§ 1-21, R.L.H. 1955; Territory v. Akase, 43 Haw.”
Territory of Hawaii v. Akase, 43 Haw. 84 (Haw. 1958). “1955, § 1-21.) If R.L.H. 1955, § 149-86 (4) is construed together with *86 R.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.