Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 97
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 97-1 (2026)

  Definitions. 

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

     §97-1  Definitions.  When used in this chapter:

     "Administrative action" means the proposal, drafting, consideration, amendment, enactment, or defeat by any administrative agency of any rule or other action governed by section 91-3.

     "Administrative agency" means a commission, board, agency, or other body, or official in the state government that is not a part of the legislative or judicial branch.

     "Contribution" includes a gift, subscription, forgiveness of a loan, advance, or deposit of money, or anything of value and includes a contract, promise, or agreement, whether or not enforceable, to make a contribution.

     "Expenditure" includes a payment, distribution, forgiveness of a loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money, or anything of value and includes a contract, promise, or agreement, whether or not enforceable, to make an expenditure.  "Expenditure" also includes compensation or other consideration paid to a lobbyist for the performance of lobbying services.  "Expenditure" excludes any amounts expended:

     (1)  For intrastate travel costs, including incidental meals and lodging; provided that this exception does not apply to any amounts expended for the travel costs of state legislators, board and commission members, or any other employees of the State; or

     (2)  By a nonprofit organization to prepare and submit an application for a grant pursuant to chapter 42F, and for each of the nonprofit organization's employees to lobby a maximum of ten hours in a month for that application.

     "Legislative action" means the sponsorship, drafting, introduction, consideration, modification, enactment, or defeat of any bill, resolution, amendment, report, nomination, appointment, or any other matter pending or proposed in the legislature.

     "Lobbying" [Definition effective until December 31, 2026.  For definition effective January 1, 2027, see below.] means communicating directly or through an agent, or soliciting others to communicate, with any official in the legislative or executive branch, for the purpose of attempting to influence legislative or administrative action or a ballot issue.  "Lobbying" shall not include the preparation and submission of a grant application pursuant to chapter 42F by a representative of a nonprofit organization.

     "Lobbying" [Definition effective January 1, 2027.  For definition effective until December 31, 2026, see above.] means communicating directly or through an agent, or soliciting others to communicate, with any official in the legislative or executive branch, for the purpose of attempting to influence legislative or administrative action or a ballot issue.  "Lobbying" includes communicating with any person identified in section 84-17(d) concerning the solicitation or award of a contract by or proposal before an administrative agency or a potential future vendor relationship with an administrative agency if any of the communications are not governed by chapter 103D or 103F.

     "Lobbying" does not include:

     (1)  Communications about a request for proposals, contract, or vendor relationship if the communications are initiated by a legislator or state employee; or

     (2)  The preparation and submission of a grant application pursuant to chapter 42F by a representative of a nonprofit organization.

    "Lobbyist" means any individual who:

     (1)  Receives or expects to receive, either by employment or contract, $1,000 or more in monetary or in-kind compensation in any calendar year for engaging in lobbying, either personally or through the lobbyist's agents; or

     (2)  For pay or other consideration, on behalf of another person:

          (A)  Engages in lobbying in excess of five hours in any month of any reporting period described in section 97-3;

          (B)  Engages in lobbying in excess of ten hours during any calendar year; or

          (C)  Makes expenditures of $1,000 or more of the person's or any other person's money lobbying during any reporting period described in section 97-3;

provided that an employee of a nonprofit organization who spends fewer than ten hours in any month lobbying on a grant application submitted pursuant to chapter 42F is not a lobbyist if the employee does not engage in lobbying on matters that are unrelated to the grant application.

     "Person" means a corporation, individual, union, association, firm, sole proprietorship, partnership, committee, club, or any other organization or a representative of a group of persons acting in concert. [L 1975, c 160, pt of §1; am L 1980, c 129, §1(a); am L 1982, c 105, §1; am L 1989, c 225, §1; am L 1995, c 220, §5; am L 2017, c 51, §2; am L 2025, c 63, §3]

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1964–2025 · leading case: Hawaii Home Infusion Assocs. v. Befitel, 157 P.3d 526 (Haw. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hawaii Home Infusion Assocs. v. Befitel, 157 P.3d 526 (Haw. 2007). · cites it 4× “" However, the phrase "within the scope of [the courts'] respective jurisdictions" simply begs the question of whether, in the case of HRS § 97-1(a), a given circuit court's jurisdiction is contingent upon the plaintiff's domicile in the corresponding county.”
Fonseca v. Pac. Constr. Co., Ltd., 513 P.2d 156 (Haw. 1973). · cites it 2× “221, § 60, compiled in RLH 1955, § 97-1, and reading: "`Employer', unless otherwise stated, includes any body of persons, corporate or unincorporated, public or private, and the legal representative of a deceased employer.”
Cuarisma v. Urban Painters, Ltd., 583 P.2d 321 (Haw. 1978). · cites it 2× “97, Revised Laws of Hawaii 1955, did not include a definition of “disability”, although the following definition was provided by § 97-1: ‘Partial disability. ’ Diminished ability to obtain employment owing to disfigurement resulting from an injury may be held to constitue…”
Lawrence v. Masami Yamauchi, 439 P.2d 669 (Haw. 1968). · cites it 18× “The trial court concluded as a matter of law, that under § 97-1, R.L.H. 1955, as it existed at the date of plaintiff's injury on February 21, 1963, that "defendants Yamauchi and Ansai were the statutory employers of the plaintiff," and that "defendant Kubota was a statutory…”
Crompton v. Tern Corp., 924 P.2d 169 (Haw. 1996). “However, as a subsequent committee report indicates, the House deleted the provision proposed by Professor Riesenfeld: The paragraph in section 97-1 referring to the responsibility of independent contractors or owners or lessees of premises has been deleted and the following…”
Ikeda v. Okada Trucking Co., Ltd., 393 P.2d 171 (Haw. 1964). · cites it 3× “1955, § 97-1. 6 *593 Subsequent to tbe filing of tbe pleadings, but prior to tbe trial, on motion of defendant, tbe trial court granted a partial summary judgment for defendant.”
Frank v. Hawaii Planing Mill Found., 967 P.2d 662 (Haw. App. 1998). “The paragraph in section 97-1 referring to situations in which an employee is loaned or hired out to another person has been modified by changing the last sentence thereof to read as follows: *475 The employee shall be deemed to remain in the sole employment of the original…”
Webb v. OSF Int'l, Inc. ICA s.d.o., filed 03/13/2024 [ada], 154 Haw. 85. Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 05/01/2024. S.Ct. Order Accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 06/12/2024 [ada]. (Haw. 2025). “…renumbered multiple times. See, e.g., RLH §§ 3604-3667 (1925); RLH §§ 7480- 7541 (1935); RLH §§ 4401-4467 (1945); RLH §§ 97-1 to 97-123 (1955). In 1963, the legislature subsequently recodified RLH chapter 97 as HRS chapter 386. See RLH Tables of Disposition, Table 1, at 9…”
Corpuz v. Hawaiian Elec. Co., 398 P.2d 154 (Haw. 1965). · cites it 4× “1955, § 97-1. 1 See Re Ichijiro Ikoma, 23 Haw. 291 ; Uyeno v.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 97-1(a) — 1 case
Hawaii Home Infusion Assocs. v. Befitel, 157 P.3d 526 (Haw. 2007). “" However, the phrase "within the scope of [the courts'] respective jurisdictions" simply begs the question of whether, in the case of HRS § 97-1(a), a given circuit court's jurisdiction is contingent upon the plaintiff's domicile in the corresponding county.”
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.