Hawaii Dog Bite Laws: Liability and Victim Rights

Under HRS 663-9, Hawaii holds dog owners liable for bite injuries without requiring proof that the owner knew the dog was dangerous. The Hawaii Court of Appeals confirmed in Hubbell v. Iseke (1986) that the statute removes the scienter requirement from negligence claims while stopping short of true strict liability.

Estimate your claim: Use our free Hawaii Dog Bite Settlement Calculator to see a rough settlement range based on the medical bills, the bite location, the victim's age, and Hawaii's liability rule.

Understanding Hawaii Dog Bite Laws

Hawaii's dog bite laws create a framework that holds dog owners accountable when their animals injure someone. The primary statute governing animal owner liability is HRS 663-9, which eliminates the need for a victim to prove the owner knew the dog was dangerous.

In 2024, Hawaii significantly strengthened its dangerous dog laws through Act 224 (HB 2058), now codified as Part III of chapter 711 at HRS 711-1140 to 711-1148, which created new criminal penalties for owners who fail to control dangerous dogs. These changes took effect in two phases during 2024 and 2025.

This guide covers everything you need to know about Hawaii's dog bite liability rules, owner responsibilities, victim rights, criminal penalties, and how to file a claim.

How Liability Works Under HRS 663-9

Many sources describe Hawaii as a "strict liability" state for dog bites, but that label is misleading. The Hawaii Court of Appeals clarified the law in Hubbell v. Iseke, 6 Haw. App. 485, 727 P.2d 1131 (1986). The case note published with the official text of HRS 663-9 states the holding directly: "Subsection (b) does not impose strict liability on dog owners."

The court held that HRS 663-9 does not create true strict liability for dog bite injuries. Instead, it removes the scienter requirement from negligence claims. This means a victim does not need to prove the owner knew the dog was vicious or dangerous, but the victim still needs to show the owner acted unreasonably.

What the Statute Actually Says

HRS 663-9 contains two subsections with different liability standards:

Under subsection (a), a dog bite victim can pursue a negligence claim without proving the owner had prior knowledge of the dog's dangerous tendencies. Under subsection (b), owners of animals known to be inherently dangerous face absolute liability.

What Victims Must Prove

To recover damages in a Hawaii dog bite case, the victim generally needs to establish:

• The defendant owned or harbored the dog
• The dog caused the victim's injuries
• The owner's conduct was unreasonable under the circumstances
• The victim was lawfully present where the bite occurred

The victim does not need to show that the owner knew the dog had bitten someone before or that the dog had a history of aggression.

Statutory Exceptions Under HRS 663-9.1

HRS 663-9.1 provides specific exceptions where a dog owner is not liable for civil damages.

Trespasser Exception

An owner or harborer is not liable if the injured person entered or remained on the premises unlawfully. A person "enters or remains unlawfully" when they are not licensed, invited, or otherwise privileged to be on the property.

Posting warnings that are "reasonably adequate" to alert others about an animal on the premises can help establish that a visitor was not privileged to enter.

For unimproved and apparently unused land that is not fenced or enclosed, a person is considered to have a license to enter unless notice against trespass has been personally communicated or posted in a conspicuous manner.

Provocation Exception

An owner is not liable when the dog caused damage "as a proximate result of being teased, tormented, or otherwise abused" without the negligence, direction, or involvement of the owner or harborer.

The provocation must be sufficient to cause a normally calm dog to react. Minor or accidental contact with a dog typically does not qualify as provocation.

Justified Use Exception

No liability attaches when the use of an animal to cause damage was justified under HRS Chapter 703, Hawaii's general provisions on justification.

Dog Owner Responsibilities in Hawaii

Hawaii law imposes several duties on dog owners to protect the public.

Duty After a Bite (HRS 142-75)

Under HRS 142-75, the owner of any dog that has bitten a human being must take "such reasonable steps as are necessary to prevent the recurrence of such incident." This creates an ongoing legal duty once a bite has occurred.

County-Level Regulations

HRS 142-75 also authorizes each county to enact and enforce ordinances regulating dog owners whose dogs have bitten, injured, or maimed a person. Hawaii's four counties each have their own animal control ordinances:

• Honolulu (City and County): Chapter 12 of the Revised Ordinances of Honolulu governs dangerous dog complaints, enforced by the Honolulu Police Department
• Hawaii County (Big Island): Chapter 4 of the Hawaii County Code includes Division 3 on Dangerous Dogs
• Maui County: Title 6 of the Maui County Code addresses animal regulations
• Kauai County: Local ordinances regulate dangerous dogs and animal control

General Owner Obligations

• License and microchip: Under HRS 143-2, it is unlawful to own or harbor a dog unless the dog is licensed and has been implanted with a microchip, although counties may modify or dispense with the licensing requirement by ordinance and the chapter does not apply to dogs under three months old. HRS 143-2.2 requires the owner to register the microchip number and the owner's contact information with a microchip registration company, and to update that information within 30 days of any change
• Leash laws: Most Hawaii counties require dogs to be leashed in public areas
• Confinement: Dogs must be securely confined on the owner's property
• Rabies vaccination: Not a state law requirement for dogs already living in Hawaii. Chapter 143 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes contains no vaccination section. Hawaii is rabies-free, and the state's rabies vaccination and FAVN blood test rules are import and quarantine requirements administered by the Hawaii Department of Agriculture Animal Quarantine Branch for dogs and cats being brought into the state
• Warning signs: An owner whose dog has been declared dangerous must post the signs provided by the animal control authority under HRS 711-1142

Violating these requirements can strengthen a victim's negligence claim and may result in additional penalties.

Act 224: Hawaii's 2024 Dangerous Dog Law

In 2024, Governor Josh Green signed Act 224 (HB 2058) into law, significantly expanding criminal penalties for dangerous dog owners. The act is codified at HRS 711-1140 to 711-1148, and several of its sections were amended by Act 21, Session Laws 2025, in technical nonsubstantive changes.

Definition of Dangerous Dog

Under HRS 711-1140, a "dangerous dog" is any dog that, without provocation, causes a bite injury to a person or another animal. The same section provides that "a dog's breed shall not be considered in determining whether it is dangerous."

A "bite injury" means any contact between an animal's mouth and teeth and the skin of a bite victim that causes visible trauma, such as a puncture wound, laceration, or other piercing of the skin. HRS 711-1140 also defines "provocation" narrowly, covering situations such as a dog defending its owner, a person bitten while committing an offense on the owner's property, teasing or abuse of the dog, and a dog protecting itself or its offspring.

Criminal Penalty Tiers

HRS 711-1144 creates a tiered system of criminal penalties for negligent failure to control a dangerous dog:

A misdemeanor sentence also carries restitution to anyone who suffered bodily injury or property damage, including counseling and rehabilitative costs, plus all boarding and retention expenses if the dog is impounded.

Before Act 224, the maximum penalty for negligent dog control in Hawaii was a petty misdemeanor.

Dangerous Dog Owner Requirements

Provisions that took effect on July 1, 2025 establish:

• A legal process for declaring dogs "dangerous"
• Requirements for owners of designated dangerous dogs
• Parameters for rescinding a dangerous dog designation
• Authority for an officer to enter the premises and seize a dangerous dog, after obtaining a search warrant or by another method authorized by law, when there is probable cause of an imminent threat or of a violation of the owner requirements

Impoundment Rules

Under HRS 711-1145, an officer with probable cause to believe a dangerous dog poses an imminent threat, or that HRS 711-1142 or 711-1144 has been violated, may enter the premises and seize and impound the dog after obtaining a search warrant or in any other manner authorized by law. If the owner cannot be found and notified, an impoundment notice must be posted conspicuously on the premises and sent by certified mail within 72 hours.

The statute contains two different five-day rules, and they are easy to confuse:

• If the owner cannot be located within five days after the dog is impounded, ownership of the dog is deemed relinquished under HRS 711-1145(3)
• If the owner has been notified that the dog is eligible for release and does not claim it within five days, the dog is deemed abandoned and ownership is deemed relinquished under HRS 711-1145(7)

An owner who is located may decline to surrender the dog by paying the animal control authority an amount sufficient to cover at least 30 days of impoundment, care, and provision costs, counting the day the dog was taken into custody. Further payments are due at least five days before each covered period expires, and missing one means ownership is deemed relinquished.

The animal control authority may euthanize an impounded dangerous dog if it determines the dog is too dangerous for its staff to care for safely, and a licensed veterinarian may find grounds to euthanize a dog that is experiencing extreme pain or is injured or disabled past recovery.

Comparative Negligence in Hawaii

Hawaii follows a modified comparative negligence system under HRS 663-31. This rule directly affects dog bite claims.

If the victim was partially at fault for the incident, their damages award is reduced by their percentage of fault. However, if the victim's share of fault reaches 51% or more, they are barred from recovering any damages.

How Comparative Negligence Applies to Dog Bites

Examples of victim behavior that might reduce a damage award:

• Ignoring posted warning signs about a dog on the property
• Reaching through a fence to pet an unfamiliar dog
• Approaching a dog that was showing signs of agitation
• Failing to follow the owner's instructions about interacting with the dog

A jury determines the percentage of fault assigned to each party and adjusts the damages accordingly.

Victim Rights and Compensation

Dog bite victims in Hawaii may recover several categories of damages.

Economic Damages

• Medical expenses, including emergency care, surgery, and rehabilitation
• Future medical costs for ongoing treatment
• Lost wages and loss of earning capacity
• Property damage

Non-Economic Damages

• Pain and suffering
• Emotional distress and psychological trauma
• Scarring and disfigurement
• Loss of enjoyment of life

The $375,000 Pain and Suffering Cap

Economic damages in Hawaii are not capped. Non-economic damages are partly capped. HRS 663-8.7 provides that "damages recoverable for pain and suffering as defined in section 663-8.5 shall be limited to a maximum award of $375,000," except in the tort actions listed in HRS 663-10.9(2).

That exception list covers intentional torts, torts relating to environmental pollution, toxic and asbestos-related torts, torts relating to aircraft accidents, strict and products liability torts, and torts relating to motor vehicle accidents. An ordinary dog bite claim under HRS 663-9 is not on the list, so the $375,000 limit applies.

The cap is narrower than it first appears. HRS 663-8.5 treats pain and suffering as only one type of non-economic damage and defines it as "the actual physical pain and suffering that is the proximate result of a physical injury sustained by a person." The same section separately lists mental anguish, disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of consortium, and other nonpecuniary losses as non-economic damages, and the $375,000 figure in HRS 663-8.7 is written against the narrower pain and suffering definition. How a court applies the cap to a particular mix of damages is a question worth raising with a Hawaii attorney early in a serious injury case.

Statute of Limitations

Under HRS 657-7, a dog bite victim must file a lawsuit within 2 years from the date of the injury. Missing this deadline almost always results in the court dismissing the case.

Key Details About the Filing Deadline

• The clock starts on the date of the bite
• The first day (date of injury) is excluded from the count, so filing on the second anniversary is timely
• Claims against government entities may have shorter notice requirements

Tolling for Minors and Persons with Disabilities

HRS 657-13 pauses (tolls) the statute of limitations for persons under a legal disability, including minors. A child injured by a dog bite may bring a claim after they turn 18, within the time limits specified by law.

Persons who are mentally incapacitated at the time of the injury also receive tolling protections under this statute.

Breed and Hawaii Dog Bite Law

Hawaii has no state statute that bans a breed, and no state statute that preempts county breed regulation. State law addresses breed in one narrow place. HRS 711-1140, the definitions section for Hawaii's dangerous dog law, provides that "a dog's breed shall not be considered in determining whether it is dangerous."

That rule governs the state dangerous dog declaration process described above. It is not a general bar on county ordinances. On county authority, Hawaii law runs the other way: HRS 142-75(c) and HRS 142-74(b) each provide that a county "may enact and enforce ordinances regulating persons who own, harbor, or keep" a dog that has bitten, injured, or maimed a person or destroyed another person's animal, and that such an ordinance "shall not be held invalid on the ground that it covers any subject or matter embraced within any statute or rule of the State," so long as it does not affect the owner's civil liability and is consistent with the statute.

Breed rules in Hawaii are therefore a county question rather than a settled statewide one. Check the current animal control ordinance for your county, or call your county animal control authority, instead of assuming a statewide rule applies to your dog.

Landlord Liability for Dog Bites

Landlords in Hawaii may face liability for injuries caused by a tenant's dog under certain circumstances. Because HRS 663-9 applies to both owners and "harborers" of animals, a landlord who allows a tenant to keep a known dangerous dog could potentially be considered a harborer.

A landlord may be liable when:

• The landlord knew or should have known the tenant's dog was dangerous
• The landlord had the ability to require removal of the dog
• The landlord failed to take reasonable action to protect others on the premises

Landlords should include clear pet policies in lease agreements and consider requiring tenants with dogs to carry renter's insurance with adequate liability coverage.

How to File a Dog Bite Claim in Hawaii

If you have been bitten by a dog in Hawaii, these steps can help protect your legal rights:

1. Get medical treatment immediately. Keep all records of treatment, prescriptions, and follow-up care.
2. Report the incident. File a report with your county's animal control agency and local police.
3. Document the scene and injuries. Take photos of bite wounds, the location, and the dog if it is safe to do so.
4. Collect the owner's information. Get the dog owner's name, address, phone number, and homeowner's or renter's insurance details.
5. Identify witnesses. Record the names and contact information of anyone who saw the attack.
6. Preserve physical evidence. Keep torn or bloodied clothing in a sealed bag.
7. Track your expenses. Maintain a record of all medical bills, lost wages, and other costs.
8. Consult a personal injury attorney. An attorney can evaluate your case and handle negotiations with the dog owner's insurance company.

Remember that the 2-year statute of limitations under HRS 657-7 begins on the date of the bite. Acting promptly gives you the strongest position.

Dangerous Dog Designation Process

The declaration process is set out in HRS 711-1141. An officer may find and declare a dog to be a dangerous dog if the officer has probable cause to believe the dog falls within the HRS 711-1140 definition, which turns on a bite injury to a person or another animal without provocation. The declaration must be based on one of three things:

• The written complaint of a person who is willing to testify that the dog acted in a manner that brings it within the definition
• Actions of the dog witnessed by an officer
• Other substantial evidence admissible in court

The declaration must be in writing and served on the owner, either personally or by certified mail to the owner's last known address. An owner who receives a declaration may initiate a contested case with the declaring officer's department or agency within 30 days after the service date.

Requirements for Owners of Dangerous Dogs

Once a dog is declared dangerous, HRS 711-1142 requires the owner to:

• Give the animal control authority the owner's name, address, and telephone number, plus the location where the dog is kept if that is a different address
• Promptly notify the animal control authority of any change in ownership or location, any further attack on a person or animal, any claim or legal action arising from an attack, and the dog's death
• Have a microchip implanted, register the microchip information under HRS 143-2.2, and give the microchip number to the animal control authority
• Keep the dog under the control of a person at least 18 years old when it is indoors at the owner's premises
• Confine the dog to a locked, escape-proof kennel when it is outdoors on the owner's premises and unattended
• When the dog is outdoors on the premises and attended, keep it on a fixed and secure leash no longer than four feet, under the control of a person at least 18, and within a fenced or walled area it cannot escape
• When the dog is outdoors away from the premises, keep it on a fixed and secure leash no longer than four feet, under the control of a person at least 18, and muzzled with a properly fitted basket muzzle
• Post the sign or signs provided by the animal control authority informing the public of the dog's presence and dangerousness
• Neuter or spay the dog at the owner's expense unless doing so is medically contraindicated

Keeping a dangerous dog in a way that violates HRS 711-1142 is itself the offense of negligent failure to control a dangerous dog, and the dog is subject to seizure and impoundment if the owner cannot immediately secure it.

Liability insurance is not on that list of conditions. A minimum insurance figure appears at a later stage instead: under HRS 711-1144(3), an owner who has negligently failed to control a dangerous dog must, unless the dog has been or is ordered to be euthanized, obtain liability insurance or post bond of "no less than $50,000," or a higher amount if the court finds a higher amount appropriate to cover medical or veterinary costs from potential future actions of the dog.

More Hawaii Laws

• Hawaii Slip and Fall Laws
• Hawaii Statute of Limitations