Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 46
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 46-12 (2026)

  Cleaning shores and beaches of seaweed, limu, and debris

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

     §46-12  Cleaning shores and beaches of seaweed, limu, and debris.  The various counties shall be responsible for removing and clearing all seaweed, limu, and debris which are likely to create an unsanitary condition or to otherwise become a public nuisance from the shores and beaches situated within the respective counties; provided that to the extent any of the foregoing work is a private responsibility, the responsibility may be enforced by the county in lieu of the work being done at public expense. [L 1965, c 191, §1; Supp, §138-55; HRS §46-12]

 

Case Notes

 

  County has sole responsibility for shores and beaches likely to be used with some frequency by members of the public.  66 H. 55, 656 P.2d 1336.

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1982–2020 · leading case: Littleton v. State, 656 P.2d 1336 (Haw. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Littleton v. State, 656 P.2d 1336 (Haw. 1982). · cites it 14× “Even assuming that HRS §§ 46-12 and 62-34(9) impose a duty upon the City to clear debris off the beaches, and the log is considered a debris, and such duty extends beyond the boundaries of the park, the law does not impose upon the City a duty to clear debris when it is being…”
Marsland v. Pang, 701 P.2d 175 (Haw. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “As to what constitutes a public nuisance within the meaning of HRS § 46-12, we consider the following statement of the Kansas court to be generally applicable: A nuisance, to be a public nuisance, must be in a public place, or where the public frequently congregate, or where…”
Haynes v. Haas., 463 P.3d 1109 (Haw. 2020). · cites it 4× “In Littleton, the court addressed whether the City and County of Honolulu could be liable for damages to a plaintiff who had been injured on the beach by a washed-up log when the City failed to fulfill its statutory mandate under HRS § 46-12 to remove debris that could…”
Collard v. United States, 691 F. Supp. 256 (D. Haw. 1988). · cites it 2× “Under Haw.Rev.Stat. § 46-12, the county is responsible for removing and cleaning all debris likely to become a public nuisance from the shores and beaches.”
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.