§661-3 No jurisdiction, when. No
person shall file or prosecute under this part any claim for or in respect to
which that person or any assignee of that person has pending an action against
a person who, at the time when the claim alleged in the action arose, was, in
respect thereto, acting or professing to act, directly or indirectly, under the
authority of the State. [L 1894-5, c 26, §3; RL 1925, §2671; RL 1935, §4422; RL
1945, §10477; RL 1955, §245-3; HRS §661-3; am L 1972, c 164, §1(c); am L 2016,
c 55, §42]
Case Notes
Section does not prevent joinder of State and person who
acted or professed to act under State's authority as defendants in one suit. 9
H. App. 21, 821 P.2d 937 (1991).
Where plaintiffs brought individual and class action claims
against only the employees' retirement system and did not file a lawsuit
against the State while there was a pending action against a person acting
under state authority, this section did not bar the circuit court from having
jurisdiction. 121 H. 462 (App.), 220 P.3d 1043 (2009).
Notes of Decisions
Fratinardo v. Employees' Ret. Sys. of the State of Hawai'i, 220 P.3d 1043 (Haw. App. 2009).
· cites it 9× “Next, ERS argues that, upon the filing of a petition to the Board for a contested case hearing on Plaintiffs’ individual claims, Plaintiffs’ class action claims are in violation of HRS § 661-3 (1993).”
Marshall v. Univ. of Hawai'i, 821 P.2d 937 (Haw. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “UH argues that under Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 661-3 (1985) 6 the lower court had no jurisdiction to entertain Counts I and II.”
Brown v. Wong, 795 P.2d 283 (Haw. 1990).
· cites it 2× “The argument made below, as best we can understand it, was that the appellee’s claims were really tort claims, not contract claims, and that because appellee had joined tort claims with the contract claim in her complaint, she was prohibited by HRS § 661-3 from pursuing the…”
Hawaiian Land Co. v. Kamaka, 547 P.2d 581 (Haw. 1976).
· cites it 2× “As held in Hawaiian Trust, there is an implied contract on the part of the State, within the meaning of HRS § 661-3 3 to pay the actual *662 earnings of the principal sum to the petitioners and a complaint stating a claim for relief (assumpsit) for money had and received would…”
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.