Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 101-25 (2026)

  Payment of judgment, penalties

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     §101-25  Payment of judgment, penalties.  The plaintiff shall within two years after final judgment pay the amount assessed as compensation or damages and upon failure so to do all rights which may have been obtained by the judgment shall be lost to the plaintiff; and if such payment is delayed more than thirty days after final judgment, then interest shall be added at the rate of five per cent a year.  The payment shall be made to the clerk of the court rendering the judgment.  The plaintiff shall within thirty days after the payment deposit in the mails of the United States a written notice addressed to the defendants, who have filed answers or appeared in court in the proceedings, or to their attorneys of record in the proceedings, if so represented, at their last known address, that the payment has been made, and the clerk of the court shall distribute the payment to those entitled thereto in accordance with the order of the court.  If the plaintiff fails to make the payment as aforesaid, the defendant shall be entitled to recover judgment as provided in section 101-27.  If the plaintiff fails to give written notice of the payment as aforesaid, interest shall be added on the amount thereof at the rate of five per cent a year until the written notice is placed in the mails or until the defendant receives from the clerk of court the amount to which the defendant is entitled under the terms of the order of court, whichever event shall first occur. [L 1896, c 45, §17; RL 1925, §823; RL 1935, §65; am L 1937, c 184, §3; am L 1941, c 55, §1; RL 1945, §316; am L 1951, c 12, §1(j); RL 1955, §8-23; HRS §101-25; gen ch 1985]

 

Case Notes

 

  Section does not apply to proceeding by U.S. 244 F. 923. Statute is substance and not procedure, therefore not applicable.  Id.

  Interest.  4 U.S.D.C. Haw. 33.  Interest relates back to date of judgment upon delay in payment of judgment.  45 H. 650, 372 P.2d 348.

  Final judgment means the judgment entered after disposition of an appeal to the supreme court.  50 H. 237, 437 P.2d 321.

  Payment of post-judgment interest on award of fair market value in leasehold condemnation.  72 H. 383, 819 P.2d 82.

  Cited:  4 U.S.D.C. Haw. 748; 30 H. 1, 6; 31 H. 781, 784; 48 H. 349, 353, 402 P.2d 683.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1973–2023 · leading case: City & Cnty. of Honolulu v. BONDED INVEST. CO., LTD., 507 P.2d 1084 (Haw. 1973).
City & Cnty. of Honolulu v. BONDED INVEST. CO., LTD., 507 P.2d 1084 (Haw. 1973). · cites it 14× “" HRS § 101-33 provides that, as a part of just compensation and damages, interest at the rate provided in HRS § 101-25 shall be given from the date of order of possession under HRS § 101-28, 29, until the final judgment is paid.”
State, by Atty. Gen. v. Pioneer Mill Co., 637 P.2d 1131 (Haw. 1981). · cites it 9× “25 in the event the foregoing sums were not deposited within thirty days of the final judgment, as provided by HRS § 101-25. 11 Pioneer subsequently moved for attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses, an award of post-judgment interest, and pre-judgment interest that had been…”
Hawaii Hous. Auth. v. Lyman, 704 P.2d 888 (Haw. 1985). · cites it 6× “In effect, the court ruled that any such interest must be paid at the rate of five percent, pursuant to HRS §§ 101-25 and 101-33, and our decision in City & County of Honolulu v.”
Hous. Fin. & Dev. Corp. v. Takabuki, 921 P.2d 92 (Haw. 1996). · cites it 10× “Instead, the Lessees and the HFDC argue that their deposits were made pursuant to HRS 101-25 (1985) [5] and represented payment of the amounts owed as per the final judgments entered by the circuit court — i.”
Hous. Fin. & Dev. Corp. v. Ferguson, 979 P.2d 1107 (Haw. 1999). · cites it 2× “See HRS §§ 101-25 (1993) and 101-33 (1993); City and County of Honolulu v.”
Littleton v. State, 708 P.2d 829 (Haw. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “The supreme court held that the term “final judgment” as used in the eminent domain *76 statute regarding the award of interest (now HRS § 101-25 (1976)) should be interpreted to mean the judgment entered after disposition of an appeal.”
Hous. Fin. & Dev. Corp. v. Castle, 819 P.2d 82 (Haw. 1991). · cites it 6× “Since the court referred to HRS § 101-25, presumably it contemplated that, from the date of judgment until payment, appellants would receive interest at the statutory rate of 5% under that section on the total amount of the judgment.”
City & Cnty. of Honolulu v. Mkt. Place, Ltd., 517 P.2d 7 (Haw. 1973). · cites it 2× “[4] HRS § 101-33 provides: If an order is made letting the plaintiff into possession as provided for in sections 101-28, 101-29, and 101-32, the final judgment shall include, as part of the just compensation and damages awarded, interest at the rate provided in section 101-25…”
Cnty. of Kauai v. Hanalei River Holdings Ltd.., 394 P.3d 741 (Haw. 2017). “” 8 HRS § 101-33 (1993) provides in pertinent part: If an order is made letting the plaintiff into possession as provided for in sections 101-28, 101-29, and 101-32, the final judgment shall include, as part of the just compensation and damages awarded, interest at the rate…”
Cnty. of Kaua'i v. Hanalei River Holdings Ltd., 375 P.3d 250 (Haw. App. 2016). “If an order is made letting the plaintiff into possession as provided for in sections 101— 28, 101-29, and 101-32, the final judgment shall include, as part of the just compensation and damages awarded, interest at the rate provided inj section 101-25 from the date of the order…”
HART v. Ward, 153 Haw. 462 (Haw. 2023). · cites it 2× “We review the circuit 84 *** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** court decision to stay the accrual of interest for abuse of discretion. Under Hawaiʻi law, a condemnor who uses the HRS § 101- 29 “quick-take” procedure is required to estimate the…”
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.