Hawaii Dog Bite Law

How dog bite liability works in Hawaii

Hawaii's dog bite statute reads like strict liability. HRS § 663-9 says the owner or harborer of an animal that causes injury "shall be liable" regardless of their "lack of scienter" of its dangerous propensities¹. Many guides list Hawaii as a strict liability state for that reason. The courts read it differently. In Hubbell v. Iseke (1986) the Intermediate Court of Appeals relied on the 1980 conference committee report, which said the bill "does not create strict liability". The statute only removes the need to prove the owner knew the dog was dangerous. You still have to prove the owner was negligent³. Franks v. Holloway (2023) confirmed that reading and noted that the legislature had left it alone for decades⁴.

The result is a middle position. Hawaii has no "free first bite": before 1980, Farrior v. Payton (1977) required proof of scienter, and the statute ended that³. But a bite is not automatically compensable either. The jury decides whether the owner acted reasonably. In Hubbell three "Beware of Dogs" signs along a driveway helped the owner win³. Only animals "known by its species or nature to be dangerous, wild, or vicious" carry absolute liability, and dogs are not in that group^1,3.

Two other rules set Hawaii apart. Because the claim is negligence, the state's $375,000 cap on physical pain and suffering appears to apply^10,12. Since July 2025 a statewide dangerous-dog law also lets officers declare a dog dangerous after one unprovoked bite injury^15,16. Compare California, where the statute makes owners liable without any proof of fault, and see the one-bite rule and the national table.

The Hawaii dog bite statute

Subsection (a) makes the owner or harborer of an animal liable for personal injury or property damage the animal proximately causes, "regardless of" their lack of scienter of its vicious or dangerous propensities¹. The courts hold that this only removes the knowledge element: you must still prove the owner or harborer was negligent^3,4. Subsection (b) makes the owner of an animal "known by its species or nature to be dangerous, wild, or vicious" absolutely liable, but it does not apply to dogs^1,3. Section 663-9.1 adds exceptions for trespassers and for animals that were teased or abused².

• Law: Haw. Rev. Stat. § 663-9 (Liability of owner or harborer of an animal), enacted 1980; last changed Unchanged since 1980 (L 1980, c 218, § 2); the exceptions in § 663-9.1 were last amended in 2017
• Injuries covered: Any injury the dog causes (bites, knock-downs, chases)
• Where: Anywhere
• Who is liable: The owner, or a keeper or harborer
• Damages: All damages, under the ordinary rules

Other ways to prove liability

Hawaii followed the common-law scienter rule until 1980: Farrior v. Payton (1977) required proof that the owner knew of the dog's dangerous propensities³. HRS § 663-9 abolished that requirement but left negligence as the basis of liability. You must show that the owner or harborer failed to use reasonable care to control the dog, and that this caused your injury^1,3,4. Franks left open whether a common-law strict liability claim survives for a dog the owner knew was vicious; the argument was waived in that case⁴. Separately from damages, HRS § 142-75 lets anyone bitten bring a district court action asking the court to order the dog removed or destroyed, and says common-law remedies are not affected¹⁴.

Defenses owners raise

Trespassing

HRS § 663-9.1(b) bars liability on the owner's premises if the jury finds you intentionally or knowingly entered or stayed there unlawfully. Posted warnings that an animal is present count against a license to enter. Premises open to the public are licensed unless you defied a lawful order to leave².

Provocation

No liability under § 663-9.1(c) if the animal was "teased, tormented, or otherwise abused" without the owner's or harborer's negligence, direction or involvement². Franks held these listed exceptions are exclusive only for absolute liability under § 663-9(b). In an ordinary dog case the usual negligence defenses also apply⁴.

Other defense

The owner is also not liable if using the animal was justified under HRS chapter 703, the state's self-defense and defense-of-property law².

Veterinarians and dog professionals

Franks v. Holloway (2023) adopted the veterinarian's rule. Primary assumption of risk bars a veterinarian or veterinary staff member from suing the owner for a bite on the job while the dog was in the clinic's care, custody and control⁴.

Other defense

Because the claim is negligence, an owner can argue they took reasonable care. In Hubbell v. Iseke a jury found no negligence where the owners had posted three "Beware of Dogs" signs, and the appeals court affirmed³.

Shared fault

Modified comparative fault (barred at 51%) (Haw. Rev. Stat. § 663-31).

Your own negligence reduces the award in proportion to your share. It bars recovery only if it is greater than the combined negligence of the defendants, so a plaintiff found 50% at fault still recovers half⁵. Because Hawaii dog bite claims are negligence claims, the statute applies to them directly, and Franks confirms that common-law negligence defenses are available^4,5.

How the five fault systems compare: provocation, trespass and shared fault.

Hawaii dog bite statute of limitations

2 years (Haw. Rev. Stat. § 657-7)

Sue within two years after the cause of action accrues; the same period covers property damage⁶. For a claim against a county, written notice must reach the official named in the county charter within two years of the injury⁸. Tort claims against the State must also be filed within two years⁹.

Children. If the bitten person was under 18, HRS § 657-13 lets them sue any time before 18 and within two years after turning 18, so until their 20th birthday⁷. The court notes to § 657-13 say the parents' own claims, such as for medical bills they paid, are not tolled. The court notes to § 662-4 say minority tolling does not apply to tort claims against the State^7,9.

Work out your own date with the dog bite claim checker, or compare deadlines in every state.

Damages

You can recover medical costs, lost earnings and noneconomic damages. Hawaii law defines those as pain and suffering, mental anguish, disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life and loss of consortium¹¹. HRS § 663-8.7 caps pain and suffering at $375,000. The cap does not apply to the torts listed in § 663-10.9(2), which include intentional torts and strict liability¹². An ordinary dog bite claim is a negligence claim, so the cap appears to apply. We found no appellate decision applying it to a dog bite. The cap covers only "actual physical pain and suffering", not the other noneconomic items^10,11. Punitive damages need clear and convincing proof that the owner acted wantonly, oppressively or with malice, or with "conscious indifference to consequences"¹³. No Hawaii statute doubles or trebles dog bite damages.

Landlords and property owners

We found no published Hawaii appellate decision, as of October 2026, on whether a landlord is liable for a tenant's dog. Section 663-9 reaches the "owner or harborer"¹. Franks treats someone who cares for the animal as a harborer, which is how a non-owner can be liable⁴. A landlord who neither owns nor keeps the dog would have to be shown negligent under general principles, and Hawaii courts have not decided how that applies to dogs. See landlord liability.

Insurance

We found no Hawaii statute limiting how homeowners or renters insurers use dog breed. The 2024 dangerous-dog law requires an owner convicted of negligent failure to control a dangerous dog to carry liability insurance or post a bond of at least $50,000, or more if the court orders it, unless the dog is euthanized¹⁸.

More on coverage, breed exclusions and renters policies: dog bite insurance.

The veterinarian's rule: Franks v. Holloway (2023)

In Franks v. Holloway, a veterinary clinic worker was bitten by a muzzled dog left in the clinic's care. Hawaii's Intermediate Court of Appeals used the case to settle three points in a published opinion⁴. First, it reaffirmed Hubbell: § 663-9 makes negligence, not strict liability, the basis of a dog owner's liability. Second, the exceptions listed in § 663-9.1 are exclusive only for absolute liability under § 663-9(b); ordinary common-law defenses remain available in dog cases⁴. Third, it adopted the veterinarian's rule. Primary assumption of risk bars a veterinarian or veterinary staff member from recovering from the owner for a bite on the job while the dog was in the clinic's care, custody and control, not the owner's⁴. Groomers, kennel staff and dog walkers were not before the court, so the rule's reach beyond veterinary work is untested. See dog bites at work.

Bite reports and quarantine

Hawaii's communicable disease rules list rabies as a reportable disease but do not list animal bites²¹. Bite investigation is local. On Oahu the Honolulu Police Department leads dangerous-dog complaints under chapter 12 of the Revised Ordinances of Honolulu, and the Hawaiian Humane Society also investigates and enforces²⁴. A dangerous-dog declaration can start from the written complaint of a person willing to testify¹⁶.

Hawaii has never had rabies start within its borders, and its quarantine program is aimed at dogs and cats arriving from elsewhere²³. No state rule sets a 10-day home observation after a bite. Instead, HAR § 11-156.1-42 lets the health director order a biting animal seized, held for observation and tested if rabies "cannot be excluded"^21,22.

Dangerous-dog hearings, euthanasia orders and criminal penalties are covered on Hawaii dangerous dog law.

Questions about Hawaii dog bite law

Is Hawaii a strict liability state for dog bites?

No, despite the wording of HRS § 663-9. The statute says the owner is liable "regardless of" lack of knowledge of the dog's dangerous propensities¹. Hubbell v. Iseke held that this only removes the knowledge requirement, and Franks v. Holloway reaffirmed it in 2023: you must still prove the owner or harborer was negligent^3,4.

Is Hawaii a one-bite state?

Not in the traditional sense. The 1980 statute abolished the rule that you had to prove the owner knew of the dog's dangerous propensities, so a first bite can lead to liability^1,3. What you need instead is proof that the owner failed to use reasonable care³.

Does a "Beware of Dog" sign protect the owner in Hawaii?

It can help in two ways. Posted warnings mean a person who enters private premises is not licensed to be there, which supports the trespass defense in § 663-9.1(b)². In a negligence case, signs are also evidence that the owner took care: in Hubbell the jury found owners with three such signs not negligent³.

Does my dog have to be quarantined after it bites someone in Hawaii?

Not as a matter of routine. Hawaii is rabies-free and sets no 10-day observation for bites²³. The health director may order an animal seized, observed and tested only if rabies "cannot be excluded"²¹. See dog bite quarantine rules by state.

Can my dog be put down after one bite in Hawaii?

A first bite can lead to a dangerous-dog declaration, but not automatically to euthanasia¹⁶. Euthanasia is mandatory only on a felony conviction for a bite that seriously injures or kills a person¹⁸. A court can also order destruction in a civil petition under HRS § 142-75 after weighing the dog's propensities and whether it can be confined¹⁴.

Is there a cap on what I can recover for a dog bite in Hawaii?

Physical pain and suffering is capped at $375,000 in negligence cases, and a dog bite claim is a negligence claim in Hawaii^10,3. Medical bills, lost wages, disfigurement and mental anguish are not subject to that cap^10,11.

Official contacts

Sources

1. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 663-9 (Liability of owner or harborer of animal), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
2. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 663-9.1 (Exceptions to liability), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
3. Hubbell v. Iseke, 6 Haw. App. 485, 727 P.2d 1131 (1986), CourtListener (Free Law Project). Checked 17 October 2026.
4. Franks v. Holloway, 153 Haw. 419, 540 P.3d 960 (App. 2023), CourtListener (Free Law Project). Checked 17 October 2026.
5. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 663-31 (Comparative negligence), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
6. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 657-7 (Damage to persons or property), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
7. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 657-13 (Infancy, insanity, imprisonment) and case notes, Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
8. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 46-72 (Liability for injuries or damages; notice), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
9. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 662-4 (State Tort Liability Act: statute of limitations) and case notes, Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
10. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 663-8.7 (Limitation on pain and suffering), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
11. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 663-8.5 (Noneconomic damages; defined), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
12. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 663-10.9 (Joint and several liability; exceptions), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
13. Masaki v. General Motors Corp., 71 Haw. 1, 780 P.2d 566 (1989), CourtListener (Free Law Project). Checked 17 October 2026.
14. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 142-75 (Dogs that bite humans; remedies), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
15. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 711-1140 (Dangerous dogs: definitions), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
16. Act 224, Session Laws of Hawaii 2024 (H.B. 2058), Relating to Dangerous Dogs (HRS §§ 711-1141, 711-1143, 711-1146, 711-1148), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
17. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 711-1142 (Legal requirements of owner), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
18. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 711-1144 (Negligent failure to control a dangerous dog; penalties), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
19. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 711-1145 (Impoundment of a dangerous dog), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
20. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 711-1147 (Exemption), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
21. Hawaii Administrative Rules chapter 11-156.1, Communicable Diseases (incl. § 11-156.1-42 Rabies and Exhibit A), Hawaii State Department of Health. Checked 17 October 2026.
22. Administrative rules filed, March 2026 (HAR 11-156.1 effective March 20, 2026), Office of the Lieutenant Governor of Hawaii. Checked 17 October 2026.
23. Rabies, Hawaii State Department of Health, Disease Outbreak Control Division. Checked 17 October 2026.
24. Policy: Animal Nuisance and Dangerous Dog Complaints, Honolulu Police Department. Checked 17 October 2026.
25. H.B. 634 (2025–2026), Relating to Dangerous Dogs: measure status, Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.