Report Title:

TORT ACTIONS; EVIDENCE.

Description:

Allows juries in civil cases, like those involving accidents, to hear evidence that operators or passengers in motor vehicles, motorcycles, or motor scooters were not wearing seat belts or helmets; currently juries are usually not allowed to hear such evidence.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES	H.B. NO.	3051
TWENTY-FOURTH LEGISLATURE, 2008
STATE OF HAWAII

A BILL FOR AN ACT

RELATING TO TORT ACTIONS.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:

     SECTION 1.  The purpose of this Act is to allow judges to exercise the authority and discretion they normally exercise with regard to all evidence, when considering whether to admit evidence of a failure to wear a seatbelt or a helmet.  Thus judges would consider such factors as whether the evidence is relevant and whether its probative value outweighs any prejudicial value.  The legislature finds that evidence of a failure to wear a seatbelt or a helmet should not be categorically excluded from evidence.

     In Kealoha v. County of Hawaii, 74 Haw. 308 (1993), the court held that evidence that a motorcyclist injured in an accident did not wear a helmet is not relevant, and therefore not admissible, because there is no common law duty on the part of motorcyclists to wear a helmet in Hawaii.  The court indicated that evidence of a motorist’s failure to wear a seatbelt would also be inadmissible, even though failure to wear a seatbelt is a criminal violation under Hawaii law, because there is no common law duty to wear a seatbelt in Hawaii.  In effect, Kealoha categorically bars such evidence in all cases.  This Act does not mandate the admission of such evidence; it simply removes the categorical bar.

     SECTION 2.  Chapter 663, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§663-  Failure to wear seat belt or helmet; consideration by court or jury. (a)  Notwithstanding any other statute to the contrary, and notwithstanding any common law principle to the contrary, the failure to wear an appropriate seat belt while operating a motor vehicle, or while riding as a passenger in a motor vehicle, may be considered as evidence by the court or jury in civil litigation with regard to all issues for which such evidence is admissible pursuant to the Hawaii Rules of Evidence if a reasonably prudent person would have worn a seat belt under the circumstances presented by the case.

(b)  Notwithstanding any other statute to the contrary, and notwithstanding any common law principle to the contrary, the failure to wear an appropriate helmet while operating a motorcycle or motor scooter, or while riding as a passenger on a motorcycle or motor scooter, may be considered as evidence by the court or jury in civil litigation with regard to all issues for which such evidence is admissible pursuant to the Hawaii Rules of Evidence if a reasonably prudent person would have worn a helmet under the circumstances presented by the case."

     SECTION 3.  New statutory material is underscored.

     SECTION 4.  This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

INTRODUCED BY:	_____________________________
	BY REQUEST