§520-3 Duty of care of owner limited.
Except as specifically recognized by or provided in section 520-5, an owner of
land owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others
for recreational purposes, or to give any warning of a dangerous condition,
use, structure, or activity on such premises to persons entering for such
purposes, or to persons entering for a purpose in response to a recreational
user who requires assistance, either direct or indirect, including but not
limited to rescue, medical care, or other form of assistance. [L 1969, c 186,
§3; am L 1997, c 272, §2; am L 2024, c 3, §2]
Case Notes
Section renders United States not liable under Federal Tort
Claims Act. 723 F.2d 705 (1984).
Encompasses any land which is used for recreation; purpose of
statute is to encourage landowners to allow others to use their land without
threat of liability; type of landowner covered by statute, discussed. 696 F.
Supp. 538 (1987).
Cited: 902 F. Supp. 1207 (1995); 916 F. Supp. 1511 (1996).
Notes of Decisions
Thompson v. Kyo-Ya Co., Ltd., 146 P.3d 1049 (Haw. 2006).
· cites it 8× “" To achieve that goal, HRS § 520-3 (Supp.1997) limits the duty of care owed by a landowner to members of the public entering the land for recreational purposes: Except as specifically recognized by or provided in [HRS § ] 520-6[ (1993) (relating to duties of persons entering…”
Crichfield v. Grand Wailea Co., 6 P.3d 349 (Haw. 2000).
· cites it 6× “HRS § 520-3 (1993 & Supp.1997). Section 520-6 provides that: Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to: (1) Create a duty of care or ground of liability for injury to persons or property.”
Wemple ex rel. Dang v. Dahman, 72 P.3d 499 (Haw. App. 2002).
· cites it 4× “In their cross-appeal, the Yoshidas sought review of the circuit court’s denial of them motion for summary judgment, claiming, inter alia, that the HRUS immunized them from any liability to Jade.”
Collard v. United States, 691 F. Supp. 256 (D. Haw. 1988).
· cites it 5× “The Recreational Use Statute was intended to limit the liability of a landowner by providing that “an owner of land owes no duty of care to keep premises safe____” Haw.Rev.Stat. § 520-3. However, even if the Recreational Use Statute is applicable, by stationing lifeguards and…”
Atahan v. Muramoto, 984 P.2d 104 (Haw. App. 1999).
· cites it 7× “) HRS § 520-3 states, in relevant part, that “an owner of land owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for recreational purposes, or to give any warning of a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity on such premises to persons entering…”
Stout v. United States, 696 F. Supp. 538 (D. Haw. 1987).
· cites it 2× “HRS § 520-3 provides in pertinent part: .”
Lansdell v. Cnty. of Kauai, 130 P.3d 1054 (Haw. 2006).
· cites it 2× “) In addition, HRS § 520-3 (Supp.2005) defines the scope of an owner’s duty in the following manner: Except as specifically recognized by or provided in section 520-6, an owner of land owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for recreational…”
Brown v. United States, 180 F. Supp. 2d 1132 (D. Haw. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Haw.Rev.Stat. § 520-3. Where an owner of land invites or permits any person to use the property, without charge, for recreational purposes, that owner’s liability is limited, 3 subject to three exceptions.”
Covington v. United States, 916 F. Supp. 1511 (D. Haw. 1996).
“§ 520-3 provides: Except as specifically recognized by or provided in section 520-6, an owner of land owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for recreational purposes, or to give any warning of a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity…”
Covington v. United States, 902 F. Supp. 1207 (D. Haw. 1995).
“§ 520-3. Except as specifically recognized by or provided in section 520-6, an owner of land who either directly or indirectly invites or permits without charge any person to use such property for recreational purposes does not thereby .”
Cupo v. Aliomanu Sand Castles, LLC, 542 P.3d 1277 (Haw. App. 2024).
“2 This case does not implicate Hawaii Revised Statutes § 520-3, part of the recreational use statute.”
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.