Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 668
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 668-17 (2026)

  Costs

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     §668-17  Costs.  All costs of the proceedings in partition shall be paid by the plaintiff in the first instance, but eventually by all of the parties in proportion to their interests, except such costs which may be occasioned by contests as to particular shares or interests, which shall be charged against the particular shares or interests involved and be paid as determined by the result of the trial of the particular issue.  In addition to costs of the proceeding the judge may allow any fee or fees for legal services rendered by the attorneys for any of the parties, and apportion the same for costs for payment by and between the parties or any of them, all as to the judge shall seem equitable in the light of the services performed and the benefits derived therefrom by the parties, respectively.  When more than ten defendants are named in a complaint for partition, no greater payment for costs shall be required of the plaintiff than would be required if there were but ten defendants. [L 1923, c 178, §17; RL 1925, §2777; am L 1929, c 179, §1; RL 1935, §4756; RL 1945, §12466; RL 1955, §337-17; HRS §668-17; am L 1972, c 90, §11(r)]

 

Case Notes

 

  Applies to attorney's fees and costs in a quiet title action required for a partition.  68 H. 429, 717 P.2d 516 (1986).

  Award of fees premature.  4 H. App. 584, 671 P.2d 1025 (1983).

  See 34 H. 686 (1938); 34 H. 854 (1939); 35 H. 262 (1939); 35 H. 682 (1940); 35 H. 779 (1941).

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1983–2005 · leading case: Kimura v. Kamalo, 107 P.3d 430 (Haw. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kimura v. Kamalo, 107 P.3d 430 (Haw. 2005). · cites it 24× “Defendants were not prohibited from filing a future partition action as between them and the Hitons if necessary.”
The Nature Conservancy v. Nakila, 671 P.2d 1025 (Haw. App. 1983). · cites it 7× “ATTORNEYS’ FEES After the conclusion of the jury trial, TNC moved for an award for reimbursement of costs and attorneys’ fees from the Drummonds pursuant to HRS §668-17 (1976). 19 TNC claimed that costs of $1,583.”
Annum Yim Kealamakia v. Unknown Heirs of Kamoehalau, 717 P.2d 516 (Haw. 1986). · cites it 7× “The trial court, however, denied this motion because it considered HRS § 668-17 inapplicable to legal expenses incurred pursuant to a quiet title action.”
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.