§666-7 Jurisdiction; joinder. In any
action for summary possession begun under this chapter, the plaintiff may join
claims for rent, lodging, board, profits, damages, and waste, where these arise
out of and refer to the land or premises, irrespective of the amount claimed.
In any such action, whether the ground or cause
is nonpayment of rent or otherwise, the plaintiff may join in the action a
prayer for accrued rent due, if any, and also for rent, profits, and damages up
to the time of judgment, if such is rendered in the plaintiff's favor, without
prejudice to such action or ground for summary possession as may be set forth
in the complaint. [L 1915, c 171, §1; am L 1923, c 93, §1; RL 1925, §2780; RL
1935, §4015; RL 1945, §10406; am L 1945, c 216, §1; RL 1955, §240-7; HRS
§666-7; am L 1972, c 90, §8(d); gen ch 1985]
Rules of Court
See DCRCP rule 18.
Case Notes
Holding over after notice of change of rent. 30 H. 29
(1927).
Recoupment for damages by reason of illegal eviction. 30 H.
434 (1928).
Items of damage recoverable by lessor. 30 H. 853 (1929).
Jurisdiction of district court where defendant demanded trial
by jury, discussed. 70 H. 288, 769 P.2d 1091 (1989).
This chapter does not preclude a landlord from joining a
breach of contract action, seeking damages as measured by future rent, with a
summary possession action. 84 H. 75, 929 P.2d 88 (1996).
Cited: 27 H. 308, 322 (1923); 40 H. 236 (1953).
Notes of Decisions
Hi Kai Inv., Ltd. v. Aloha Futons Beds & Waterbeds, Inc., 929 P.2d 88 (Haw. 1996).
· cites it 14× “In construing the language of HRS §§ 666-7 9 and 666-13, 10 we find no support for the contention that the issuance of the writ of possession precludes Landlords from recovering damages for Tenants’s breach.”
Lum v. Sun, 769 P.2d 1091 (Haw. 1989).
· cites it 7× “” HRS § 666-7. The defendant may now also have any counterclaim “aris[ing] out of and referring] to the land or premises, the possession of which is being sought,” other than a real action or one in which the title to real *297 estate comes in question, heard in the district…”
Forbes v. Hawaii Culinary Corp., 946 P.2d 609 (Haw. App. 1997).
· cites it 4× “Plaintiff-Appellee Michelle Forbes (Forbes) also refers to HRS § 666-7 (1993) which permits the plaintiff suing for summary possession to join other claims with the summary possession action: In any action for summary possession begun under this chapter, the plaintiff may join…”
State ex rel. Kanbara v. Hilo Metals Co., 500 P.2d 743 (Haw. 1972).
· cites it 4× “On July 8, 1971, the State of Hawaii instituted summary possession proceedings against Hilo Metals (the appellant herein) in the district court, pursuant to HRS §§ 666-1, 1 and 666-6, 2 as well as an action *643 for rent under HRS § 666-7 3 and for collection of back property…”
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.