§101-31  Payment of estimated compensation; effect thereof.  Upon the application of the parties entitled thereto the court may order that the amount of the estimated compensation or damages stated in the motion and paid to the clerk of the court, or any part thereof, be paid forthwith for or on account of the just compensation to be awarded in the proceedings.  If an additional deposit of money has been paid to the clerk of the court pursuant to section 101-28 the amount of the additional deposit or of any portion thereof, shall not, without the consent of the plaintiff, be paid to the party.  A payment to any party as aforesaid shall be held to constitute an abandonment by the party of all defenses interposed by the party, excepting the party's claim for greater compensation or damages.  If the compensation or damages finally awarded in respect of the land or any parcel thereof exceeds the amount of the money so received by any person entitled, the court shall enter judgment for the amount of the deficiency.  The unexpended moneys and any additional security so deposited with the clerk of the court shall be available for, or for enforcement of, the payment of any final judgment awarded by the court. [L 1937, c 184, pt of §5; RL 1945, §319, pt of subs 1; am L 1947, c 200, pt of §1(d); am L 1951, c 12, pt of §1(l); RL 1955, §8-29; HRS §101-31; gen ch 1985]

Case Notes

  Where estimate of compensation deposited to obtain immediate possession is in excess of final award, condemnee must make restitution with interest.  54 H. 385, 507 P.2d 1084.

  Where the plaintiff county of Kauai ("county") sought to withdraw a portion of the estimated just compensation that had been deposited with the court following eminent domain proceedings, the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the county to withdraw a portion of the amount deposited.  The estimated just compensation had not been dispersed to the landowners when the county, which appeared to have acted in good faith, sought to adjust the estimate to accurately reflect the value of the property on the date of summons, and the adjustment did not impair the substantial rights of the landowners.  137 H. 471 (App.), 375 P.3d 250 (2016).