Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 449
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 449-16 (2025)

  Accounting for moneys, property, etc

✓ laws through the 2025 session: the 2026 session is not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     §449-16  Accounting for moneys, property, etc.  (a)  Every licensee under this chapter shall have the responsibility of a trustee for all moneys, other consideration, or instruments received by it.  No licensee shall mingle any such moneys or other property with its own moneys or other property, or with moneys or other property held by it in any other capacity.  All moneys held by a licensee in escrow as herein defined shall be deposited in financial institutions, payable on demand.  Under this chapter, deposits in financial institutions are limited to sweep accounts as described in this section, checking accounts, money market deposit accounts, and savings accounts with no specified maturity date.  Deposits at financial institutions may be held in sweep accounts, provided that:

     (1)  The licensee using the sweep account shall have a net worth of not less than $1,000,000;

     (2)  The sweep account is a deposit account administered by a financial institution in which the moneys over a minimum balance are periodically transferred into a money market mutual fund account invested only in obligations of:

          (A)  The United States government;

          (B)  Agencies backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government; or

          (C)  Agencies originally established or chartered by the United States government to serve public purposes; and

          periodically recredited to the sweep account; and

     (3)  The licensee is liable for all moneys transferred to the money market mutual fund account under the sweep account, including any loss of value.

     (b)  No licensee shall disburse funds from an escrow account until cash and or items sufficient to fund any disbursements from the account have been received and deposited to the account, and with respect to such items the licensee complies with the provisions of either paragraphs (1) or (2) hereof.

     (1)  Where an item has been received and submitted for collection, no licensee shall disburse funds from an escrow account with respect to the item until final settlement of the item has been received by the financial institution to which the item has been submitted for collection.

     (2)  No licensee shall disburse funds from the escrow account with respect to an item drawn on a financial institution until the licensee confirms that sufficient collected funds are on deposit in the drawer's account.

     (c)  A licensee may deliver any money, consideration, or instrument affecting the title to real property prior to funds becoming available for disbursement under subsection (b) if it has received the written consent of the parties to the transaction. [L 1967, c 144, pt of §1; HRS §449-16; am L 1985, c 269, §50; am L 1986, c 331, §3; am L 2001, c 184, §5]

 

Case Notes

 

  Fiduciary duty of escrow depository owed only to escrow parties.  4 H. App. 41, 659 P.2d 759 (1983).

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: DeMello v. Home Escrow, Inc., 659 P.2d 759 (Haw. App. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
DeMello v. Home Escrow, Inc., 659 P.2d 759 (Haw. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “” HRS § 449-16 (1976). Clearly, the law imposes on an escrow depository a certain fiduciary duty.”
Stanton v. Bank of Am., N.A., 834 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (D. Haw. 2011). · cites it 2× “etwork (Count X); a civil conspiracy claim alleging that Countrywide, Loan Network, and Fidelity Escrow conspired to defraud Plaintiff (Count XI); an aiding *1068 and abetting claim against Countrywide, Loan Network, and Fidelity Escrow (Count XII); a negligence claim against…”
Yamaguchi v. Title Guar. Escrow Servs., Inc, 587 P.3d 682 (Haw. 2026). · cites it 26× “Accordingly, we also hold that Yamaguchi failed to raise a genuine issue as to whether Title Guaranty breached its fiduciary duty under HRS § 449-16. With respect to Yamaguchi’s breach of contract claim, Title Guaranty had a legal obligation to follow the terms of the Escrow…”
Yamaguchi v. Title Guar. Escrow Servs., Inc., 557 P.3d 909 (Haw. App. 2024). · cites it 4× “" Under HRS § 449-16 (2013), Title Guaranty had "the responsibility of a trustee for all moneys" it received from Yamaguchi. Title Guaranty received conflicting instructions from Pacrep before it disbursed Yamaguchi's funds.”
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 449-16(a): 1 case
Yamaguchi v. Title Guar. Escrow Servs., Inc, 587 P.3d 682 (Haw. 2026). “Accordingly, we also hold that Yamaguchi failed to raise a genuine issue as to whether Title Guaranty breached its fiduciary duty under HRS § 449-16. With respect to Yamaguchi’s breach of contract claim, Title Guaranty had a legal obligation to follow the terms of the Escrow…”
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.