Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 88
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 88-23 (2026)

  General administration of system vested in board. 

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

     §88-23  General administration of system vested in board.  The general administration and the responsibility for the proper operation of the retirement system and for making effective the provisions of this part and parts VII and VIII are vested in a board of trustees; subject, however, to the area of administrative control vested in the department of budget and finance by sections 26-8 and 26-35.  To fulfill its responsibilities, the system may require any department or agency of the State or counties to furnish information to the system to carry out the purposes of this chapter. [L 1925, c 55, §5(1); RL 1935, pt of §7924; RL 1945, pt of §707; RL 1955, §6-60; HRS §88-23; am L 1969, c 110, pt of §1; am L 1982, c 165, §2(1); am L 1984, c 108, §1; am L 2002, c 128, §3; am L 2005, c 58, §3]

 

Case Notes

 

  Powers and duties of board are functionally equivalent to those of board of directors of a private corporation and limited only by "the areas of administrative control" reserved to the department of budget and finance by §§26-8 and 26-35.  87 H. 152, 952 P.2d 1215.

  Where no showing that board's failure to authorize and pursue appeal would precipitate crisis in system's operations or jeopardize system's corporate existence, system's purported administrator could not initiate appeal on system's behalf under exception to general rule that only corporation's board possesses authority to control corporation's litigation.  87 H. 152, 952 P.2d 1215.

  Without express authorization of employees' retirement system board, attorney general lacked power to file appeal on board's behalf from circuit court's final order; where attorney general perceived conflict of interest with board, attorney general was ethically obligated to recommend retention of other counsel to represent board and take other appropriate action.  87 H. 152, 952 P.2d 1215.

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1998–2014 · leading case: Kaho'ohanohano v. State, 162 P.3d 696 (Haw. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kaho'ohanohano v. State, 162 P.3d 696 (Haw. 2007). · cites it 12× “HRS § 88-23 (Supp.2002). The system is funded by contributions from State and county employers, as well as State and county employees.”
Kahoohanohano v. State, 162 P.3d 696 (Haw. 2007). · cites it 12× “HRS § 88-23 (Supp.2002). The system is funded by contributions from State and county employers, as well as State and county employees.”
Honda Ex Rel. Kamakana v. Bd. of Trs. of the Employees' Ret. Sys., 120 P.3d 237 (Haw. 2005). · cites it 12× “Additionally, HRS § 88-23, which creates the ERS Board, vests the "general administration and the responsibility for the proper operation of the retirement system and for making effective the provisions of this part and part VII[ [7] ] of this chapter .”
Chun v. Bd. of Trs., 952 P.2d 1215 (Haw. 1998). · cites it 10× “[HRS § 88-23 8 ] grants the Board the authority of the general administration and proper operation of the state retirement system and for making effective the provision of the law.”
Honda Ex Rel. Honda v. Bd. of Trs. of the Employees' Ret. Sys., 118 P.3d 1155 (Haw. 2005). · cites it 4× “]" HRS § 88-23 (1993) (emphasis added). See Op.”
Lahaina Fashions, Inc. v. Bank of Hawai‘i., 319 P.3d 356 (Haw. 2014). · cites it 2× “In Honda, this court concluded that the ERS Board owed a fiduciary duty to the retirement system because they were “trustees” pursuant to HRS § 88-23, and “[t]rustees, by definition, are imbued with fiduciary duties.”
Preble v. Bd. of Trs., 143 P.3d 37 (Haw. 2006). · cites it 3× “Effective July 1, 2002 and July 1, 2004, the legislature amended HRS § 88-23 in immaterial respects. See 2005 Haw.”
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.