§489-3 Discriminatory practices
prohibition. Unfair discriminatory practices that deny, or attempt to
deny, a person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities,
privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation
on the basis of race; sex, including gender identity or expression; sexual
orientation; color; religion; ancestry; or disability, including the use of a
service animal, are prohibited. [L 1986, c 292, pt of §1; am L 1990, c 210, §2;
am L 1992, c 33, §5; am L 2006, c 76, §3; am L 2018, c 217, §8]
Law Journals and Reviews
An Analysis of Hawai`i's Tradition of "Local"
Ethnic Humor. 30 UH L. Rev. 219.
Airbnb in Paradise: Updating Hawai`i's Legal Approach
Towards Racial Discrimination in the Sharing Economy. 39 UH L. Rev. 435
(2017).
Hounds at the Hospital, Cats at the Clinic: Challenges
Associated with Service Animals and Animal-Assisted Interventions in Healthcare
Facilities. 40 UH L. Rev. 53 (2018).
Case Notes
Individual plaintiffs' claims under this section were
reinstated against defendants, where one of the defendants allegedly made a
racial slur that was either directed at or witnessed by the individual
plaintiffs. 300 F. Supp. 2d 1003.
Notes of Decisions
State v. Hoshijo Ex Rel. White, 76 P.3d 550 (Haw. 2003).
· cites it 24× “Hoshijo, the Executive Director of the HCRC appearing on behalf of Complainant, and the HCRC (collectively Appellees) for discrimination in public accommodations pursuant to HRS §§ 489-3 (1993) and 489-9 (1993). The court reversed the HCRC's finding that Wallace was an employee…”
Cervelli v. Aloha Bed & Breakfast, 415 P.3d 919 (Haw. App. 2018).
· cites it 21× “The Circuit Court ruled that Aloha B&B violated HRS § 489-3 by discriminating against the Plaintiffs on the basis of their sexual orientation.”
Hawaiian Ass'n of Seventh-Day Adventists v. Wong., 305 P.3d 452 (Haw. 2013).
· cites it 2× “es by individuals who are not members of the SDA’s church would violate public accommodation laws pursuant to HRS § 489-3 (2008), which prohibits "[u]nfair discriminatory practices that deny, or attempt to deny, a person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services,…”
E & J Lounge Operating Co. v. Liquor Comm'n of Honolulu, 189 P.3d 432 (Haw. 2008).
· cites it 2× “3d 550, 560 (2003) (using HRS § 1-16 as authority for its decision to read HRS §§ 489-3 and 498-2 in pari materia); Black’s Law Dictionary at 806 (“It is a canon of construction that statutes that are in pari materia may be construed together, so that inconsistencies in one…”
State of Hawaii v. Donald Trump, 859 F.3d 741 (9th Cir. 2017).
“Specific to refugees, the State created the Office of Community Services (“OCS”), which is directed to “[a]ssist and coordinate the efforts of all public and private agencies providing services which affect the disadvantaged, refugees, and immigrants.”
State v. Kamana'o, 188 P.3d 724 (Haw. 2008).
· cites it 2× “All of these statutes relate to sentencing, and, therefore, should be construed in pari materia.”
Dawkins v. City of Honolulu, 761 F. Supp. 2d 1080 (D. Haw. 2010).
· cites it 6× “or under HRS § 489-3. If Plaintiff intended to asserts such claims, he must amend the Complaint to assert them against Defendant City, along with allegations describing the wrongful conduct of Defendant City that underlies those claims.”
State v. Kamanao, 188 P.3d 724 (Haw. 2008).
· cites it 2× “3d 550, 560 (2003) (using HRS § 1-16 as authority for its decision to read HRS §§ 489-3 and 498-2 in pari materia ).”
Hyatt Corp. v. Honolulu Liquor Comm'n, 738 P.2d 1205 (Haw. 1987).
· cites it 2× “” HRS § 489-3 (Supp. 1986). 9 The interpretation of this section urged by Hyatt would render the role of the corporation counsel meaningless and destroy the vitality of the quoted provision.”
Temple v. Abercrombie, 903 F. Supp. 2d 1024 (D. Haw. 2012).
· cites it 2× “In particular, HRS § 489-3 provides: Unfair discriminatory practices that deny, or attempt to deny, a person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation on the basis of race, sex,…”
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.