§604-7 Powers; venue. (a) The
district courts may:
(1) Administer oaths;
(2) Subpoena and compel the attendance of witnesses
from any part of the State, and compel the production of books, papers,
documents, or tangible things;
(3) Enter final judgments; and alter or set aside any
judgment within ten days following the date of its rendition or as provided by
the rules of court;
(4) Enforce judgments; and punish contempts according
to law;
(5) Issue garnishee summons which may be served and
shall be operative as to the garnishee throughout the State;
(6) In a criminal case, alter, set aside, or suspend
a sentence by way of mitigation or otherwise upon motion or plea of a defendant
made within thirty days after imposition of the sentence.
Every witness duly subpoenaed as provided in
this section shall be allowed the same attendance and mileage fees allowed
witnesses subpoenaed before the circuit courts.
(b) Any document requiring the signature of a
district judge, in any cause or proceeding whatsoever in a district court, may
be signed without, as well as within, the boundaries of the circuit in which
the court is situated.
(c) A summons or other writ issued by a
district court may be served anywhere within the State. A summons or other
writ issued by a district court may be served without the State in accordance
with section 634-24, 634-25, 634-34, 634-35, or 634-36.
(d) Except as otherwise provided, civil
actions shall be brought in the district court of the judicial circuit in which
the defendant or a majority of the defendants reside or the claim for relief
arose. The venue may be changed or the case transferred as provided by
sections 604-7.3 and 604-7.4.
(e) The several district courts shall have
power to make and award judgments, decrees, orders, and mandates, issue such
executions and other processes, and do such other acts and take such other
steps as may be necessary to carry into full effect the powers which are or
shall be given them by law or for the promotion of justice in matters pending
before them. [L 1892, c 57, §12; RL 1925, §2275; am L 1925, c 145, §1; RL 1935,
§3764; am L 1935, cc 23, 110, §1; am L 1937, c 19, §1; RL 1945, §9675; am L
1945, c 80, §2; am L 1951, c 278, §1; am L 1955, cc 40, 197, §1; RL 1955,
§216-6; am L 1957, c 152, §1 and c 246, §1; am L 1963, c 108, §1; HRS §604-7;
am L 1970, c 188, §15; am L 1971, c 144, §3; am L 1975, c 122, §1; am L 1983, c
249, §2; am L 2002, c 8, §1; am L 2011, c 171, §1]
Cross References
Witness fees, see §§607-12 and 621-7.
Rules of Court
Altering or setting aside of judgment, see DCRCP rules 59,
60.
Service, see DCRCP rule 4.
Subpoenas, see DCRCP rule 45.
Venue, see DCRCP rules 3, 82.
Law Journals and Reviews
Civil Practice in the Honolulu District Courts—An Outline for
the Young Attorney. 1 HBJ, no. 8, at 14 (1963).
Contemporary Contempt: The State of the Law in Hawaii.
I HBJ, no. 13, at 59 (1997).
Case Notes
Formerly police courts had no jurisdiction to issue civil
process to be issued outside of its district. 8 H. 416 (1892).
Continuance on return day, presumed made after service. 15
H. 486 (1904).
Power to alter final judgment; may correct record to conform
to truth. 24 H. 600 (1919).
Power to vacate void judgment. 40 H. 302 (1953).
Motion for reduction of sentence made two years after
imposition of sentence is not timely made. 50 H. 624, 446 P.2d 559 (1968).
Where the State orally moved the district court to reconsider
its decision to dismiss the charges against defendant on the same day that the
court dismissed the charges, and the protection against double jeopardy did not
apply because the district court’s dismissal of the charges did not constitute
an acquittal, based on the plain language of subsection (a)(3), the district
court had the power to grant the State’s oral motion to reconsider the court’s
dismissal of the charges with prejudice. 128 H. 449 (App.), 290 P.3d 519
(2012).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases (
8 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case:
Miller v. Tanaka, 910 P.2d 129 (Haw. App. 1996).
Miller v. Tanaka, 910 P.2d 129 (Haw. App. 1996).
· cites it 16× “provision of the general statute outlining the district courts' powers" in HRS § 604-7(e) (1993). HRS § 604-7(e), like HRS § 602-5(7), grants the district court such powers as we have held to encompass the power to remand in Arlt .”
State v. Clemente, 290 P.3d 519 (Haw. App. 2012).
· cites it 10× “1953) (discussing the legislative history of the enactment of the ten-day period in predecessor to HRS § 604-7). 7 Here, the State orally moved the District Court to reconsider its decision to dismiss the charges on the same day and within one hour of the District Court’s…”
Hawaii Home Infusion Assocs. v. Befitel, 157 P.3d 526 (Haw. 2007).
· cites it 2× “IV (1993) and § 604-7 (Supp.2002), concerning venue in the circuit and district courts, respectively, "it should not be assumed that [HRS] § 91-7 contains a `venue' provision.”
State v. Rothman, 779 P.2d 1 (Haw. 1989).
· cites it 2× “9(6) appears in the chapter on district court at HRS § 604-7(e). However, the powers of the district judges are to be exercised to carry into effect their powers given by law, and their jurisdiction on criminal cases are severely limited by HRS §§ 604-8 and -9.”
State v. Cooley, 233 P.3d 713 (Haw. App. 2010).
· cites it 5× “HRS § 604-7(e) (1993) provides: § 604-7 Powers; venue. [[Image here]] (e) The several district courts shall have power to make and award judgments, decrees, orders, and mandates, issue such executions and other processes, and do such other acts and take such other steps as may…”
Meyer v. Basco., 526 P.3d 258 (Haw. 2023).
· cites it 2× “Further, HRS § 604-7(e) (2016) provides the district courts with “power to .”
State v. Rivero-Garcia (Haw. App. 2026).
· cites it 16× “HRS § 604-7 provides a district court's general power: "[t]he district courts may: .”
State v. Fay, 537 P.3d 441 (Haw. App. 2023).
· cites it 5× “Although the CICC helps victims by providing some compensation, victims of property crimes and some violent crimes are not eligible for any 9 HRS § 604-7(4) (2016), states: § 604-7 Powers; venue. (a) The district courts may: .”
Scutt v. Maui Mem'l Hosp., 149 Haw. 207 (Haw. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “2d 1335, 1338 (1994); HRS § 604-7(e) (2016). Scutt's opening brief presents no argument about why the district court's dismissal without prejudice was improper.”
Scutt v. Maui Med. Grp., 149 Haw. 207 (Haw. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “2d 1335, 1338 (1994); HRS § 604-7(e) (2016). Scutt's opening brief presents no argument about why the district court's dismissal without prejudice was improper.”
Scutt v. Dorris, 488 P.3d 1281 (Haw. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “2d 1335, 1338 (1994); HRS § 604-7(e) (2016). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Order Dismissing Without Prejudice, filed on November 25, 2020, in the District Court of the Second Circuit, Wailuku Division, is affirmed.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 604-7(4) — 1 case
State v. Fay, 537 P.3d 441 (Haw. App. 2023).
“Although the CICC helps victims by providing some compensation, victims of property crimes and some violent crimes are not eligible for any 9 HRS § 604-7(4) (2016), states: § 604-7 Powers; venue. (a) The district courts may: .”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 604-7(a) — 1 case
State v. Rivero-Garcia (Haw. App. 2026).
“HRS § 604-7 provides a district court's general power: "[t]he district courts may: .”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 604-7(a)(3) — 1 case
State v. Clemente, 290 P.3d 519 (Haw. App. 2012).
“1953) (discussing the legislative history of the enactment of the ten-day period in predecessor to HRS § 604-7). 7 Here, the State orally moved the District Court to reconsider its decision to dismiss the charges on the same day and within one hour of the District Court’s…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 604-7(a)(3)(1993) — 1 case
State v. Clemente, 290 P.3d 519 (Haw. App. 2012).
“1953) (discussing the legislative history of the enactment of the ten-day period in predecessor to HRS § 604-7). 7 Here, the State orally moved the District Court to reconsider its decision to dismiss the charges on the same day and within one hour of the District Court’s…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 604-7(e) — 7 cases
Miller v. Tanaka, 910 P.2d 129 (Haw. App. 1996).
“provision of the general statute outlining the district courts' powers" in HRS § 604-7(e) (1993). HRS § 604-7(e), like HRS § 602-5(7), grants the district court such powers as we have held to encompass the power to remand in Arlt .”
State v. Rothman, 779 P.2d 1 (Haw. 1989).
“9(6) appears in the chapter on district court at HRS § 604-7(e). However, the powers of the district judges are to be exercised to carry into effect their powers given by law, and their jurisdiction on criminal cases are severely limited by HRS §§ 604-8 and -9.”
State v. Cooley, 233 P.3d 713 (Haw. App. 2010).
“HRS § 604-7(e) (1993) provides: § 604-7 Powers; venue. [[Image here]] (e) The several district courts shall have power to make and award judgments, decrees, orders, and mandates, issue such executions and other processes, and do such other acts and take such other steps as may…”
Meyer v. Basco., 526 P.3d 258 (Haw. 2023).
“Further, HRS § 604-7(e) (2016) provides the district courts with “power to .”
Scutt v. Maui Mem'l Hosp., 149 Haw. 207 (Haw. App. 2021).
“2d 1335, 1338 (1994); HRS § 604-7(e) (2016). Scutt's opening brief presents no argument about why the district court's dismissal without prejudice was improper.”
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.