Hawaii's rule: barred only when you exceed the combined defendants
Under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 663-31, contributory negligence does not bar recovery as long as the claimant's negligence was not greater than the negligence of the person, or the aggregate negligence of multiple people, against whom recovery is sought. Damages are diminished in proportion to the claimant's own degree of fault — but only once that fault actually exceeds 50%, reaching 51%, does recovery get barred entirely.
The 50/51 distinction, precisely
A claimant found exactly 50% at fault still recovers half of their damages under Hawaii's rule, because 50% is not greater than the combined defendants' 50%. A claimant found 51% at fault recovers nothing at all. This precise phrasing is what makes Hawaii a genuine "51% rule" state, more forgiving than the smaller group of states that bar recovery at fault merely equal to the defendant's.
Multiple defendants: the aggregate matters, not each one individually
Where more than one defendant is involved, Hawaii compares the claimant's fault against the combined, aggregate negligence of all those defendants together — not against each defendant's individual share separately. This is a meaningful structural detail in any claim involving multiple at-fault parties.
Worked example
Someone with $100,000 in damages, found 30% at fault, recovers $70,000 — reduced by their own share, since 30% is less than the combined defendants' 70%. That same person, found 51% at fault instead, recovers nothing at all, even though their share of responsibility only shifted by a single percentage point past the midpoint.
A rule that only applies to claims from 1969 onward
Hawaii's comparative negligence statute applies only to claims accruing on or after July 14, 1969 — the date it took effect. Claims accruing before that date were governed by the older, far stricter rule of contributory negligence, where any fault at all barred recovery entirely. This is now a matter of legal history rather than practical relevance to a current claim.
Why the fight over fault stays intense near the 50/51 line
Because the practical difference between a 50/50 finding and a 51/49 finding is the difference between a substantial recovery and zero, insurers have a real, concentrated incentive to argue a claimant's fault upward toward that exact threshold. See our guide to how adjusters build a fault argument in Hawaii for what that negotiation actually looks like.