Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 386
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 386-78 (2026)

  Compromise

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

     §386-78  Compromise.  (a)  No compromise in regard to a claim for compensation pending before the director shall be valid unless it is approved by decision of the director as conforming to this chapter and made a part of the decision.

     (b)  No compromise in regard to a claim for compensation shall be effected and approved in any appeal until after the director has been notified of the proposed terms thereof and has had an opportunity to be heard relative thereto. [L 1963, c 116, pt of §1; Supp, §97-77; HRS §386-78; am L 1969, c 17, §2; am L 1973, c 11, §1; am L 1982, c 59, §1; gen ch 1985; am L 1995, c 234, §12; am L 2014, c 25, §§1, 4]

 

Note

 

  The repeal and reenactment note at subsection (a) in the main volume took effect on June 30, 2016, pursuant to L 2014, c 25, §4.

 

Case Notes

 

  Where letter withdrawing compensability issue did not result in final disposition of case, claimants properly and timely filed request for attorney's fees and costs under provisions of administrative rule after appeals board's final decision and order.  84 H. 390 (App.), 935 P.2d 105 (1997).

  Cited:  24 H. 97, 102 (1917); 31 H. 672, 673 (1930).

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2022 · leading case: Survivors of Iida v. Oriental Imports, Inc., 935 P.2d 105 (Haw. App. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Survivors of Iida v. Oriental Imports, Inc., 935 P.2d 105 (Haw. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “An appeal compromised pursuant to HRS § 386-78, according to the provisions of the statute, is one that has been approved by the Director and made a part of the Director’s decision: “No compromise in regard to a claim for compensation pending before the director shall be valid…”
Tamashiro v. Control Specialist, Inc., 34 P.3d 16 (Haw. 2001). · cites it 2× “No compromise shall be effected in the appeal except in compliance with section 386-78. (b) The appellate board shall hold a full hearing de novo on the appeal.”
Amantiad v. Odum, 977 P.2d 160 (Haw. 1999). · cites it 2× “This section’s reference to an employer’s protection from future payments is only limited to the amount of the settlement.”
Wittig v. Allianz, A.G., 145 P.3d 738 (Haw. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “This provides an additional safeguard against possible overreaching by an employer or insurance carrier in settling a workers’ compensation claim.”
Lindinha v. Hilo Coast Processing Co., 86 P.3d 973 (Haw. 2004). “HAR § 12-47-55 states in relevant part that [wjithin ten calendar days following the filing of a final decision and order, or upon the filing of a stipulation and settlement agreement with respect to an appeal compromised pursuant to section 386-78, HRS, attorneys seeking…”
Frank v. Hawaii Planing Mill Found., 963 P.2d 349 (Haw. 1998). “Except as provided in section 386-78, no contract, rule, regulation or devise whatsoever shall operate to relieve the employer in whole or in part from any liability created by this chapter.”
In re Attorney's Fees to McLaren v. Paradise Inn Hawaii, Inc., 321 P.3d 671 (Haw. 2014). “No compromise shall be effected in the appeal except in compliance with section 386-78. (b) The appellate board shall hold a full hearing de novo on the appeal.”
Jou v. Hamada, 201 P.3d 614 (Haw. App. 2009). “No compromise shall be effected in the appeal except in compliance with section 386-78. (b) The appellate board shall hold a full hearing de novo on the appeal.”
Catron v. Tokio Marine Mgmt., Inc., 978 P.2d 845 (Haw. 1999). “1997) provides that "[n]o compromise in regard to a claim for compensation pending before the director shall be valid unless it is approved by decision of the director as conforming to this chapter and made a part of the decision.” 3 . Catron’s complaint also named GTE Hawaiian…”
Gour v. Honsador Lumber, LLC, 332 P.3d 701 (Haw. App. 2014). “No compromise shall be effected in the appeal except in compliance with section 386-78. (b) The appellate board shall hold a full hearing de novo on the appeal.”
Harter v. Cnty. of Hawaii, 628 P.2d 629 (Haw. 1981). “HRS § 386-9 reads: Except as provided in section 386-78 [approved compromises], no contract, rule, regulation or device whatsoever shall .”
Frank v. Hawaii Planing Mill Found., 967 P.2d 662 (Haw. App. 1998). · cites it 3× “HRS § 386-78 (1993) provides: Compromise, (a) No compromise in regard to a claim for compensation pending before the director shall be valid unless it is approved by decision of the director as conforming to this chapter and made a part of such decision; provided that any…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 386-78(a) — 4 cases
Amantiad v. Odum, 977 P.2d 160 (Haw. 1999). “This section’s reference to an employer’s protection from future payments is only limited to the amount of the settlement.”
Survivors of Iida v. Oriental Imports, Inc., 935 P.2d 105 (Haw. App. 1997). “An appeal compromised pursuant to HRS § 386-78, according to the provisions of the statute, is one that has been approved by the Director and made a part of the Director’s decision: “No compromise in regard to a claim for compensation pending before the director shall be valid…”
Catron v. Tokio Marine Mgmt., Inc., 978 P.2d 845 (Haw. 1999). “1997) provides that "[n]o compromise in regard to a claim for compensation pending before the director shall be valid unless it is approved by decision of the director as conforming to this chapter and made a part of the decision.” 3 . Catron’s complaint also named GTE Hawaiian…”
Salanoa v. Hawaiian Elec. Co. (D. Haw. 2022).
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.