Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 671
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 671-4 (2026)

  Notice of damages

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

     §671-4  Notice of damages.  (a)  In any medical tort action, the party against whom the complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim is made at any time may request a statement setting forth the nature and amount of the damages sought.  The request shall be served upon the complainant, counterclaimant, or cross-claimant who shall serve a responsive statement as to the damages within fifteen days thereafter.  In the event a response is not served, the requesting party may petition the court with notice to the other parties, to order the appropriate party to serve a responsive statement.

     (b)  If no request is made for a statement setting forth the nature and amount of damages sought, the complainant, counterclaimant, or cross-claimant, as the case may be, shall give notice to the other of the amount of special and general damages sought to be recovered, either before a default may be taken, or in the event an answer is filed, at least sixty days prior to the date set for trial. [L 1976, c 219, pt of §2; am L 1980, c 232, §36; am L 1992, c 55, §2]

 

Case Notes

 

  Medical malpractice claim not dismissed for violation of section where other claims brought with it.  69 H. 305, 741 P.2d 1280 (1987).

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1987–1987 · leading case: Tobosa v. Owens, 741 P.2d 1280 (Haw. 1987).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tobosa v. Owens, 741 P.2d 1280 (Haw. 1987). · cites it 14× “” HRS § 671-4. 4 The ultimate question in this appeal is whether or not it was appropriate in the circumstances to dismiss the plaintiffs’ suit on grounds that they failed to abide by the foregoing provisions of HRS §§671-12 and 671-4 in suing a hospital and a physician on a…”
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 671-4(a): 1 case
Tobosa v. Owens, 741 P.2d 1280 (Haw. 1987). “” HRS § 671-4. 4 The ultimate question in this appeal is whether or not it was appropriate in the circumstances to dismiss the plaintiffs’ suit on grounds that they failed to abide by the foregoing provisions of HRS §§671-12 and 671-4 in suing a hospital and a physician on a…”
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.