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

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 97-8 (2025)

]

✓ laws through the 2025 session: the 2026 session is not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     [§97-8]  Presumption of lobbying on behalf of private clients.  [Section effective January 1, 2027.]  Any individual with a substantial ownership interest in or a paid employee, officer, or director of an organization, who actively participates in lobbying activities that directly benefit that organization, shall be presumed to be receiving compensation from the organization for their lobbying efforts.  This presumption shall not include communications made solely for informational purposes, ceremonial interactions, or routine relationship building that do not involve advocacy for or against specific outcomes. [L 2025, c 63, pt of §2]

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1969–2012 · leading case: State v. Schnabel., 279 P.3d 1237 (Haw. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Schnabel., 279 P.3d 1237 (Haw. 2012). · cites it 6× “(citing RLH § 97-8). Similarly, this general rule applies to the instant situation because an evidentiary *478 framework exists where parties are expected to make timely, specific objections when challenging the admissibility of evidence.”
Demond v. Univ. of Hawaii, 503 P.2d 434 (Haw. 1972). · cites it 6× “1955 § 97-8, which, in pertinent part, provides: § 97-8.”
Berkness v. Hawaiian Elec. Co., 462 P.2d 196 (Haw. 1969). · cites it 3× “§ 97-8 2 by deleting therefrom the fifth unnumbered paragraph and *439 substituting five paragraphs.”
Lawhead v. United Air Lines, 584 P.2d 119 (Haw. 1978). “Compare § 386-6 with RLH § 97-8 (1955)(which is entitled “Injuries without the Territory” and which only consists of two paragraphs virtually identical to ¶¶ 2,3 of § 386-6) and RLH § 3646 (1925)(same, except that it is entitled “Injuries outside the Territory”).”
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.