Georgia and Hawaii

Georgia vs Hawaii Personal Injury Laws: A Comprehensive Legal Analysis

8 min read

  • 12 rules side by side
  • 10 sections

Hawaii’s $375,000 limit applies only to pain and suffering, not to every noneconomic loss, and not at all in car crash, product, or intentional tort cases (HRS §§ 663-8.7, 663-10.9(2)). Georgia has no such limit. Hawaii’s no-fault law blocks a crash lawsuit until an injury threshold is met, and a malpractice claim must go to a state panel before suit. Hawaii lets an injured person recover at 50 percent fault; Georgia does not.

Which state’s law applies

A Georgia court applies the law of the state where the injury happened. In Dowis v. Mud Slingers, Inc. (2005), the Supreme Court of Georgia held that “a tort action is governed by the substantive law of the state where the tort was committed.” An injury on a Hawaii visit, sued in Georgia, is therefore decided under Hawaii’s rules on fault and damages. Deadlines follow a different rule. In Harvey v. Merchan (2021), the Supreme Court of Georgia said that “[s]tatutes of limitations are generally procedural in nature, and therefore those of the forum state govern”, so a suit filed in Georgia generally runs on Georgia’s deadline, not Hawaii’s. The exception is a foreign statute that “creates a cause of action that is not recognized in the common law and includes a specific limitation period”: that period governs when it is shorter than Georgia’s. Whether a Georgia court can hear the case at all, which depends on jurisdiction over the defendant and on venue, is a separate question that these rules do not answer. A Hawaii court applies its own choice-of-law rules, which should be checked before filing there.

Side by side

Topic Georgia Hawaii
Injured person's own fault Recovery reduced; barred at 50% or more (O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33) Recovery reduced; barred only if the injured person's negligence is greater than that of the defendants combined (HRS § 663-31)
Pain and suffering limit None $375,000, except in the case types listed in § 663-10.9(2) (§ 663-8.7)
Defendants sharing fault Each pays only its own share, apart from concerted action (§ 51-12-33(b)) Joint and several for economic damages; for noneconomic damages, joint and several against a defendant 25% or more at fault; fully joint and several in listed case types (§ 663-10.9)
Personal injury and property damage deadline 2 years for injury (§ 9-3-33); 4 years for personal property (§ 9-3-31) 2 years after the cause of action accrued, for injury and property alike (§ 657-7)
Wrongful death deadline 2 years from death (§ 9-3-33) 2 years from death (§ 663-3)
Medical malpractice deadline 2 years from injury; 5 years from the act at most (§ 9-3-71) 2 years from discovery; 6 years from the act at most, extended while a provider fails to disclose a known error (§ 657-7.3)
Malpractice pre-suit step Expert affidavit filed with the complaint (§ 9-11-9.1) Written inquiry to the medical inquiry and conciliation panel before suit in a state court (§ 671-12)
Car crash threshold for tort claims None Death, significant permanent loss of use, permanent and serious disfigurement, or PIP benefits of $5,000 or more (§ 431:10C-306(b))
Minimum liability limits $25,000 / $50,000 / $25,000 (§ 33-7-11) $40,000 / $80,000 / $20,000 for policies on or after January 1, 2026 (§ 431:10C-301(b))
Uninsured motorist coverage Included unless a named insured rejects it in writing (§ 33-7-11(a)(3)) Included unless a named insured rejects it in writing (§ 431:10C-301(b)(3))
Claims against the State Notice within 12 months; $1 million / $3 million cap (§§ 50-21-26, 50-21-29) Suit within 2 years after the claim accrues (§ 662-4)
Alcohol sellers Statute: knowing service to a noticeably intoxicated person or unlawful service to a minor, knowing the person will soon drive (§ 51-1-40) Court-made duty: a licensee may not serve a person under the influence (Ono v. Applegate, 1980, relying on § 281-78)

Hawaii dog bite liability, punitive damages, the treatment of insurance and other collateral payments, and claims against counties under § 46-72 sit outside this comparison; a county claim in particular needs § 46-72 read in the version in force on the date of the injury.

The $375,000 limit is narrower than it looks

Section 663-8.7 says: “Damages recoverable for pain and suffering as defined in section 663-8.5 shall be limited to a maximum award of $375,000; provided that this limitation shall not apply to tort actions enumerated in section 663-10.9(2).”

Two parts of that sentence set the limit’s reach:

  1. Only pain and suffering. Section 663-8.5(a), as quoted by the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals in Ozaki v. Association of Apartment Owners of Discovery Bay (1998), lists “pain and suffering, mental anguish, disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of consortium, and all other nonpecuniary losses or claims” as separate kinds of noneconomic damages. The limit reaches the first of those, not the others.
  2. Not in the listed case types. Section 663-10.9(2) lists intentional torts, environmental pollution, toxic and asbestos-related torts, aircraft accidents, strict and products liability, and “torts relating to motor vehicle accidents”. In each of those, the $375,000 limit does not apply.

The practical result: a visitor hurt in a Hawaii car crash, or by a defective product, faces no pain-and-suffering limit, while a medical malpractice or slip-and-fall claimant does. Wrongful death damages under § 663-3, such as loss of society, companionship, and parental care, are separate items listed in that statute.

Georgia has no comparable limit; its malpractice cap in § 51-13-1 cannot be applied to pain and suffering (Nestlehutt, 2010) or to a death verdict that also includes the decedent’s pre-death pain and suffering, and whether it reaches a wrongful death award standing alone is unresolved (Clark v. Leigh, 2026).

Fault and who pays

Under § 663-31(a), contributory negligence does not bar recovery “if such negligence was not greater than the negligence of the person or in the case of more than one person, the aggregate negligence of such persons against whom recovery is sought”. At 50 percent, the injured person’s negligence is not greater than the defendants’, so recovery is reduced, not barred. In Georgia, 50 percent bars recovery (§ 51-12-33(g)).

Injured person's fault, $100,000 found Georgia Hawaii
40% $60,000 $60,000
50% $0 $50,000
51% $0 $0

Hawaii also keeps more joint and several liability than Georgia. Under § 663-10.9, every joint tortfeasor remains liable for the full economic damages in injury and death cases; for noneconomic damages, a defendant 25 percent or more at fault is jointly and severally liable, and one below 25 percent pays in proportion; and in the § 663-10.9(2) case types, including car crashes and product cases, liability for both kinds of damages is joint and several. In Georgia, each defendant pays only its own share, apart from defendants who acted in concert (§ 51-12-33(b)).

Car crashes: no-fault first

Hawaii abolishes tort liability for accidental harm from motor vehicle accidents in the State except in the situations listed in § 431:10C-306(b):

  • death;
  • a significant permanent loss of use of a part or function of the body;
  • a permanent and serious disfigurement that causes mental or emotional suffering; or
  • personal injury protection benefits incurred that “equal or exceed $5,000”.

Personal injury protection pays treatment and related expenses up to an aggregate limit of $10,000 per person (§ 431:10C-103.5(c)). The tort limits do not shield an at-fault driver who caused injury intentionally, engaged in criminal conduct, or drove impaired in violation of § 291E-61 (§ 431:10C-306(e)), and property damage claims are not abolished (§ 431:10C-306(f)).

Hawaii’s minimum liability limits rose to $40,000 per person, $80,000 per accident, and $20,000 for property damage for new and renewal policies effective on or after January 1, 2026, according to the Hawaii Insurance Division. Georgia’s minimum remains 25/50/25 and Georgia has no tort threshold.

Medical malpractice: discovery clock and a pre-suit panel

Hawaii’s malpractice period runs two years from when the patient discovers, or with reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury, “but in any event not more than six years after the date of the alleged act or omission”. The six years are “tolled for any period during which the person has failed to disclose any act, error, or omission upon which the action is based and which is known to the person” (§ 657-7.3). A minor under ten has six years or until the tenth birthday, whichever is longer.

Before suing in a Hawaii state court, a person with concerns about a medical tort “shall submit an inquiry to the medical inquiry and conciliation panel”, in writing, with the facts and the names of the known parties (§ 671-12(a)).

Georgia’s two years run from the date the injury occurred, not from discovery, with a five-year outer limit (§ 9-3-71), and Georgia’s pre-suit step is an expert affidavit filed with the complaint (§ 9-11-9.1).

Wrongful death

Hawaii allows the action by the deceased’s legal representative or by the persons the statute lists, and damages are “fair and just compensation, with reference to the pecuniary injury and loss of love and affection”, including loss of society, companionship, comfort, consortium, protection, marital and parental care (§ 663-3(b)). Those entitled include the surviving spouse, reciprocal beneficiary, children, father, mother, and anyone wholly or partly dependent on the deceased. Except for last-illness and burial expenses, the damages do not become part of the estate.

Georgia measures the claim by the full value of the life of the decedent and gives the right to sue to the spouse, then the children, then the parents (§§ 51-4-2, 51-4-4). Both states allow two years from death.

Alcohol sellers

Hawaii has no dram shop statute of Georgia’s kind; its rule comes from Ono v. Applegate (1980). The Hawaii Supreme Court held “that this jurisdiction’s liquor control statute does impose a duty upon a tavern keeper not to serve a person under the influence of liquor”, relying on HRS § 281-78, and held that the consequences of serving an intoxicated motorist “are foreseeable to a tavern owner”. Georgia’s statute adds an element: the server must know the person “will soon be driving a motor vehicle” (§ 51-1-40(b)).

Dates and documents to pin down

  1. Where the injury happened, which sets the governing law in a Georgia court, and where the suit will be filed, which generally sets the deadline.
  2. For a Hawaii crash, the PIP benefits incurred so far, and whether the injury is permanent.
  3. Whether the claim falls in a § 663-10.9(2) case type, which removes the pain-and-suffering limit.
  4. For a malpractice claim, the date of discovery, the date of the act, and whether the panel inquiry has been filed.
  5. For property damage, Hawaii’s two years compared with Georgia’s four.

How Georgia’s own rules work is explained in the Georgia personal injury law guide. Michigan’s no-fault threshold is compared in how Michigan’s no-fault threshold compares with Georgia’s tort system.

Sources

General information about Georgia and Hawaii law as of October 2026. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.