Hawaii
How Davis v. State of Georgia applies in Hawaii: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
Hawaii follows the principles established in Davis v. State of Georgia concerning state liability for negligence. While acknowledging the need for public entities to be held accountable, Hawaii law emphasizes the discretionary function exception to the tort claims, which often protects governmental actions from tort claims.
In Hawaii, public entities can be held liable for negligence unless the action involves a discretionary function, which is protected under Hawaii Revised Statutes § 662-15.
The court held that the discretionary function exception applies to governmental entities when making policy or planning decisions.
This case clarified the standard for public duty, establishing that the state could be liable if a special relationship is found between the state and the injured party.
The court determined that state actions stemming from policy decisions regarding resource allocation fell under the discretionary function exception.
Hawaii's approach closely mirrors the federal discretionary function exception found in the Federal Tort Claims Act. Both frameworks prioritize governmental discretion in policy matters, although Hawaii's statutes impose a more rigid structure on state liability.
Understanding the discretionary function exception is critical for Hawaii bar examinees as it can significantly impact liability assessments in tort cases.