Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 92
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-6 (2026)

  Judicial branch, quasi-judicial boards and investigatory functions; applicability

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

     §92-6  Judicial branch, quasi-judicial boards and investigatory functions; applicability.  (a)  This part shall not apply:

     (1)  To the judicial branch.

     (2)  To adjudicatory functions exercised by a board and governed by sections 91-8 and 91-9, or authorized by other sections of the Hawaii Revised Statutes.  In the application of this subsection, boards exercising adjudicatory functions include, but are not limited to, the following:

          (A)  Hawaii labor relations board, chapters 89 and 377;

          (B)  Labor and industrial relations appeals board, chapter 371;

          (C)  Hawaii paroling authority, chapter 353;

          (D)  Civil service commission, chapter 26;

          (E)  Board of trustees, employees' retirement system of the State of Hawaii, chapter 88;

          (F)  Crime victim compensation commission, chapter 351; and

          (G)  State ethics commission, chapter 84.

     (b)  Notwithstanding provisions in this section to the contrary, this part shall apply to require open deliberation of the adjudicatory functions of the land use commission. [L 1975, c 166, pt of §1; am L 1976, c 92, §8; am L 1985, c 251, §11; am L 1998, c 240, §6]

 

Cross References

 

  Civil service commission, see definition of "merit appeals board" in §76-11.  See also §26-5.

 

Rules of Court

 

  Applicability of Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure, see HRCP rule 81(b)(12).

 

Case Notes

 

  County planning commission's closed deliberations permissible under this section despite open meeting mandate of section 92-3.  64 H. 431, 643 P.2d 55.

  Adjudicatory functions include adoption of conclusions of law.  4 H. App. 633, 675 P.2d 784.

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Chang v. Plan. Com'n of Cnty. of Maui, 643 P.2d 55 (Haw. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Chang v. Plan. Com'n of Cnty. of Maui, 643 P.2d 55 (Haw. 1982). · cites it 18× “I that the proceedings of the Land Use Commission be governed by its open meeting requirements, notwithstanding section 92-6 which provides for the exclusion of adjudicatory functions from open meeting requirements.”
Outdoor Circle v. Harold K.L. Castle Trust Est., 675 P.2d 784 (Haw. App. 1983). · cites it 6× “We assume that LUC’s counsel drafted and incorporated the conclusions of law in the March 7,1978 order and decision.”
E & J Lounge Operating Co. v. Liquor Comm'n of Honolulu, 189 P.3d 432 (Haw. 2008). · cites it 2× “See HRS § 92-6(a)(2) (1993 & Supp.1998) (providing that chapter 92 does not apply to "adjudicatory functions .”
Thatcher v. Hawaii State Pub. Charter Sch. Comm'n, 522 P.3d 1130 (Haw. App. 2023). · cites it 7× “2 See HRS § 92-6 (2012), providing, in part: §92-6 Judicial branch, quasi-judicial boards and investigatory functions; applicability.”
In re Off. of Info. Practices Opinion Letter No. F16-01. (Haw. 2020). · cites it 2× “3d at 1101 , we construe that Smith is referring to HRS § 92-6, which indicates that HRS Chapter 92 does not apply to the judiciary or to agency adjudicatory functions, including those exercised by certain enumerated boards and commissions, but does apply to require open…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-6(a) — 1 case
Chang v. Plan. Com'n of Cnty. of Maui, 643 P.2d 55 (Haw. 1982). “I that the proceedings of the Land Use Commission be governed by its open meeting requirements, notwithstanding section 92-6 which provides for the exclusion of adjudicatory functions from open meeting requirements.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-6(a)(2) — 4 cases
Chang v. Plan. Com'n of Cnty. of Maui, 643 P.2d 55 (Haw. 1982). “I that the proceedings of the Land Use Commission be governed by its open meeting requirements, notwithstanding section 92-6 which provides for the exclusion of adjudicatory functions from open meeting requirements.”
E & J Lounge Operating Co. v. Liquor Comm'n of Honolulu, 189 P.3d 432 (Haw. 2008). “See HRS § 92-6(a)(2) (1993 & Supp.1998) (providing that chapter 92 does not apply to "adjudicatory functions .”
Outdoor Circle v. Harold K.L. Castle Trust Est., 675 P.2d 784 (Haw. App. 1983). “We assume that LUC’s counsel drafted and incorporated the conclusions of law in the March 7,1978 order and decision.”
Thatcher v. Hawaii State Pub. Charter Sch. Comm'n, 522 P.3d 1130 (Haw. App. 2023). “2 See HRS § 92-6 (2012), providing, in part: §92-6 Judicial branch, quasi-judicial boards and investigatory functions; applicability.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-6(b) — 2 cases
Outdoor Circle v. Harold K.L. Castle Trust Est., 675 P.2d 784 (Haw. App. 1983). “We assume that LUC’s counsel drafted and incorporated the conclusions of law in the March 7,1978 order and decision.”
Chang v. Plan. Com'n of Cnty. of Maui, 643 P.2d 55 (Haw. 1982). “I that the proceedings of the Land Use Commission be governed by its open meeting requirements, notwithstanding section 92-6 which provides for the exclusion of adjudicatory functions from open meeting requirements.”
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.