Hawaii Slip and Fall Settlement Calculator
Get a rough estimate of what a Hawaii slip-and-fall claim might be worth. Enter your medical bills and losses and answer a few plain questions — the tool weighs how provable the owner's fault is and your share of fault. This is an estimate to understand the factors, not a prediction or an offer.
This is a rough estimate, not a prediction or an offer.
Slip-and-fall claims turn on proving the property owner was at fault — there is no formula that predicts a settlement. This shows the factors and a wide range to help you understand value. Consult a Hawaii premises-liability attorney about your case.
Enter the medical bills and losses to see an estimated range
The multiplier method is a rough starting point, not a guarantee. Slip-and-fall value depends most on proving the owner's fault and on the available insurance. An attorney is the only way to value your specific claim. This tool is not legal advice and RecordingLaw.com is not a law firm.
How the Estimate Works
No tool can predict a slip-and-fall settlement. This calculator applies the multiplier method (pain and suffering as a multiple of your medical bills), then does something the thin online calculators skip: it weighs how provable the owner's fault is. A spill the staff caused or knew about is worth far more than a hazard nobody can show the owner knew about. It then estimates your own comparative fault from a few plain questions and applies Hawaii's rules.
Proving the Owner Was at Fault
Premises liability has four parts: a dangerous condition existed, the owner knew or should have known about it, they failed to fix it or warn you, and that caused your injury. The middle part — notice — is where most slip-and-fall cases are won or lost. Strong evidence (an incident report, photos of the hazard, surveillance video, cleaning and maintenance logs, prior complaints) is what turns a claim from a token offer into real money. A posted warning sign or cone works against you: it shows the owner did warn, and it makes the hazard "open and obvious," shifting fault onto you.
Hawaii Premises-Liability Rules
Open-and-obvious hazards. In Hawaii, an open-and-obvious hazard is only a comparative-fault factor (it reduces, not bars). Hawaii has REJECTED the open-and-obvious (known-or-obvious danger) doctrine as a no-duty rule or complete bar. In Steigman v. Outrigger Enterprises, Inc., 126 Hawai'i 133, 267 P.3d 1238 (Haw. 2011), the Hawaii Supreme Court held that the obviousness of a danger does not negate the landowner's duty of reasonable care; instead, any known or obvious characteristics of the hazard are merely factors weighed in the comparative-negligence analysis under HRS 663-31. The court reasoned the no-duty version was incompatible with Hawaii's comparative-negligence statute and modern tort policy. This builds on Pickard v. City & County of Honolulu, 51 Haw. 134, 452 P.2d 445 (1969), which abolished the common-law invitee/licensee/trespasser status distinctions and imposed a single duty of reasonable care toward all foreseeable entrants. So an obvious hazard reduces (apportions) but does not bar recovery.
Ice and snow. Hawaii applies an ordinary reasonable-care duty to ice and snow, so a poorly-maintained walkway can support a claim. Hawaii does not follow the "natural accumulation" no-duty rule for ice/snow (a doctrine from cold-weather states like Illinois and Ohio); as a tropical jurisdiction it has no body of native ice/snow case law on the point. Hawaii instead applies a general duty of reasonable care to all landowners/occupiers toward foreseeable entrants under Pickard v. City & County of Honolulu, 51 Haw. 134, 452 P.2d 445 (1969), reaffirmed in Steigman (2011). A possessor of land owes a duty to use reasonable care to keep the premises safe and to warn of or remedy hazards (including transitory substances such as water/rain accumulation) that it knew or should have known about. There is therefore no special immunity for naturally accumulated conditions; ordinary reasonable-care/notice principles govern.
Public property. If you fell on government property, Hawaii requires a formal notice of claim before you can sue. Hawaii has NO short (90/180-day) notice-of-claim trap. (1) State property: the State Tort Liability Act sets a 2-year limitations period to begin suit (HRS § 662-4) with no separate pre-suit notice prerequisite. (2) County/municipal property (e.g., a fall on a county sidewalk, street, or other public place): HRS § 46-72 requires written notice to the designated county officer (or the council chairperson/county clerk) stating when, where, and how the injury occurred and the amount claimed — but the period is now TWO YEARS, not the old six months. The former six-month notice/limitations period was held unconstitutional (equal-protection / Haw. Const. art. I, §5) in Salavea v. City & County of Honolulu, 117 Hawai'i 16, 175 P.3d 51 (Haw. App. 2007); the Legislature amended § 46-72 to a two-year period to conform to HRS § 662-4. Practical tip: give the county written notice as early as possible, since it is a statutory condition precedent to suing a county.
Your Fault & the Deadline to File
Hawaii follows modified comparative negligence (51% bar). Your award is reduced by your share of fault, and you recover nothing once you are 51% or more at fault.
HRS 663-31 abolishes contributory negligence as a complete bar and adopts modified comparative negligence. A plaintiff may recover only if their negligence "was not greater than" the aggregate negligence of the defendant(s); damages are diminished in proportion to the plaintiff's share of fault. Because recovery is allowed when the plaintiff is exactly 50% at fault but barred when their fault is "greater than" the defense (i.e., 51%+), Hawaii is a modified-51 ("greater than") state. In jury trials the jury must return a special verdict stating both the total damages and each party's percentage of negligence.
Hawaii generally requires a slip-and-fall lawsuit to be filed within 2 years of the fall (the statute of limitations). HRS 657-7 requires actions for the recovery of compensation for damage or injury to persons or property to be instituted within two years after the cause of action accrued. Hawaii applies a discovery rule: accrual occurs when the plaintiff discovers, or through reasonable diligence should have discovered, the negligent act, the resulting damage, and the causal connection. Medical-tort claims have their own limitation/repose periods under HRS 657-7.3. Source: Steigman v. Outrigger Enterprises, Inc., 126 Hawai'i 133, 267 P.3d 1238 (Haw. 2011) (rejecting open-and-obvious as no-duty bar; obviousness is a comparative-fault factor); Pickard v. City & County of Honolulu, 51 Haw. 134, 452 P.2d 445 (1969) (unitary reasonable-care duty to all entrants); HRS § 663-31 (comparative negligence, 51% bar); HRS § 662-4 (State Tort Liability Act, 2-yr limitations); HRS § 46-72 (county injury notice, 2 yrs); Salavea v. City & County of Honolulu, 117 Hawai'i 16, 175 P.3d 51 (Haw. App. 2007) (striking the prior 6-month county period); HRS § 657-7 (2-yr PI statute of limitations)..
- Open-and-obvious is NOT a defense to duty in Hawaii — Steigman v. Outrigger Enterprises (2011) made an obvious hazard merely one factor in the comparative-fault calculus, so a victim can still recover (reduced by their share of fault).
- Hawaii uses modified comparative negligence with a 51% bar (HRS 663-31): you recover if you are 50% or less at fault, and your award is reduced by your percentage; at 51%+ you recover nothing.
- Landowners owe a single duty of reasonable care to all foreseeable entrants (Pickard, 1969) — no invitee/licensee/trespasser status games. As a tropical state, Hawaii has no ice/snow 'natural accumulation' immunity; ordinary notice-of-hazard rules apply (e.g., rainwater tracked into a store).
- Personal-injury claims must be filed within 2 years (HRS 657-7). The same 2-year clock effectively governs both state (HRS 662-4) and county (HRS 46-72) claims — there is no 90- or 180-day notice trap, unlike many mainland states.
- Suing a COUNTY (Honolulu, Maui, Kauai, Hawaii County) requires written notice under HRS 46-72 describing when/where/how the injury happened and the amount claimed; give it early as a condition precedent, even though the deadline is now 2 years after the old 6-month rule was struck in Salavea (2007).
Frequently Asked Questions
How much is my Hawaii slip and fall claim worth?
No one can tell you a number in advance, and slip-and-fall is harder than a car accident because you must prove the owner was at fault. A rough estimate adds your economic damages and a pain-and-suffering multiplier, discounts it by how provable the owner's fault is, and reduces it for your share of fault under Hawaii's modified comparative negligence (51% bar) rule. The available insurance also caps recovery — an attorney is the only way to value your specific case.
Does a "wet floor" sign hurt my Hawaii claim?
Yes, usually. A posted warning shows the owner satisfied part of their duty to warn and makes the hazard "open and obvious," which shifts fault onto you. In Hawaii, an open-and-obvious hazard is only a comparative-fault factor (it reduces, not bars). It reduces — and sometimes defeats — a claim, but not always (a hidden or inadequate sign may not help the owner).
Can I sue for a fall on ice or snow in Hawaii?
Hawaii applies an ordinary reasonable-care duty to ice and snow, so a poorly-maintained or unaddressed icy walkway can support a claim, subject to your own comparative fault. This is general information, not legal advice — consult a Hawaii attorney.
How long do I have to file in Hawaii?
Generally 2 years from the fall. If you fell on public property, a much shorter notice-of-claim deadline (around 730 days) applies first. HRS 657-7 requires actions for the recovery of compensation for damage or injury to persons or property to be instituted within two years after the cause of action accrued. Hawaii applies a discovery rule: accrual occurs when the plaintiff discovers, or through reasonable diligence should have discovered, the negligent act, the resulting damage, and the causal connection. Medical-tort claims have their own limitation/repose periods under HRS 657-7.3.
Is this calculator accurate?
It is a rough estimate to show the factors that drive value — not a prediction or an offer. Slip-and-fall outcomes vary enormously and depend on proving fault and on the available insurance. Treat any number here as a ballpark and consult a Hawaii attorney.
Disclaimer
This estimator is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a prediction of any outcome. RecordingLaw.com is not a law firm. The value of a slip-and-fall claim can only be assessed by a licensed attorney reviewing your specific facts.