Deadlines to File Professional Negligence / Medical Malpractice
Claims in Hawaii
The deadline for filing most professional negligence / medical
malpractice claims in court in Hawaii is two (2)
the date when the plaintiff knew or should have known of
the negligence of the medical care provider and that injuries
resulted therefrom. It is not necessary for an expert to
advise the injured party that there was professional negligence
which caused the injuries before the statute of limitations
will start running.
It should be noted, however, that there are
exceptions to this rule- for example, claims
against the City and County of Honolulu and
the various other Counties must be filed with the appropriate agency
within six (6) months of the date of the accident.
It is sufficient to start the running
of the 2 year (or 6 month) period, if the injured parties have knowledge
of the facts which establish an actionable claim. Buck v.
Miles, Hawaii Sup. Ct. No. 20368 (Jan. 25, 1999). Some statutes
appear to indicate that there is also a maximum limit of
six (6) years from the date of the alleged negligence in
which to file a medical malpractice claim.
You must file your claims in
court prior to the expiration of such deadlines, or your
claims may be lost—regardless of their merit.
To be wise it is recommended that you immediately contact an attorney
after an accident giving rise to injuries occurs- please do not
hesitate to :
Hawaii Personal Injury Attorney now for a free evaluation of your case.
Generally a medical malpractice claim arises where a medical
practitioner has negligently caused injury. Medical treatment
is negligent if if fails to meet the standard of care generally
provided to patients. A physician must also obtain "informed
consent" to any medical treatment which he/she provides
to a patient. Since medical malpractice claims
are very expensive to pursue, there must be very
substantial damage caused by the malpractice
to merit bringing a claim.
of Professional Negligence / Medical Malpractice Claims
Some examples of potential medical malpractice claims are:
- Administration of incorrect medicine causing injury
- Failure to diagnose or incorrect
diagnosis causing injury
- Improper or incorrect medical treatment causing injury
- Improperly performed surgery
- Improperly administered anesthesia
- Failure to obtain informed consent to a medical procedure
- Implantation of non-approved medical devices
a Medical professional
American Board of Medical Specialties.
The AMBS listing of most medical specialty boards- click on "Who's certified?"
For medical professionals in the state of Hawaii, you may also find
the information in the InjuryLawyerHawaii website to be helpful-
Hawaii Medical Experts- reviews and links
Select Hawaii Court
Opinions on Professional Negligence and Medical Malpractice
GARCIA v. KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS, JUNE 9, 1999
The Hawaii Supreme Court holds (1) that an employee's claims against a health care plan
provided by his employer (Kaiser) for failure/refusal to provide timely treatment for hip necrosis and
a herniated disk are are preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
and (2) that such claims against health care providers must go through the Medical
Claims Conciliation Panel (MCCP) under HRS § 671-12 (1993) prior to the filing of the complaint
or they are subject to dismissal.
AGA v. HUNDAHL, MARCH 24, 1995.
The Hawaii Supreme Court holds that privileged peer review
committee documents may become discoverable if they are relied upon by a medical expert
in forming his opinions (for the defense of a medical malpractice action)- but that in
order to preserve such an objection the party seeking discovery
must move for an in camera inspection of the same by the trial court prior to trial.
BLAIR v. ING, SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 The Hawaii Supreme Court holds that (1) there is no requirement that a judgment
be a ruling "on the merits of the claim" as opposed to a dismissal in order for a party to be a "prevailing party"
for purposes of attorney's fees [overruling Yoshida v. Nobriga, 39 Haw. 254 (1952); Schubert v. Saluni,
9 Haw. App. 591, 855 P.2d 858 (1993); Shanghai Investment Co. v. Alteka Co., Ltd., 92 Hawai`i 482,
993 P.2d 516 (2000) and others] and (2) awards $23,008.83 in attorney's fees and costs to a defendant
in an accounting malpractice case dismissed on motion.
PIEDVACHE v. KNABUSCH, AUGUST 27, 1998
The Hawaii Supreme Court holds that the limit for attorney's
fees in a state District Court action in 'the nature of assumpsit"
(failure to comply with post-closing real estate covenants)
is 25% of the jurisdictional limit of $20,000 - hence $5,000.00.
(apparently would apply by analogy to real estate agent "malpractice")