Haw. Rev. Stat. § 580-47
In addition to any other relevant factors considered, the court, in ordering spousal support and maintenance, shall consider the following factors:
The court may order support and maintenance to a party for an indefinite period or until further order of the court; provided that in the event the court determines that support and maintenance shall be ordered for a specific duration wholly or partly based on competent evidence as to the amount of time that will be required for the party seeking support and maintenance to secure adequate training, education, skills, or other qualifications necessary to qualify for appropriate employment, whether intended to qualify the party for a new occupation, update or expand existing qualification, or otherwise enable or enhance the employability of the party, the court shall order support and maintenance for a period sufficient to allow completion of the training, education, skills, or other activity, and shall allow, in addition, sufficient time for the party to secure appropriate employment.
HRS § 580-47
Law Journals and Reviews
An Essay in Family Law: Property Division, Alimony, Child Support, and Child Custody. 6 UH L. Rev. 381.
Administering Justice or Just Administration: The Hawaii Supreme Court and the Intermediate Court of Appeals. 14 UH L. Rev. 271.
Gussin v. Gussin: Appellate Courts Powerless to Mandate Uniform Starting Points in Divorce Proceedings. 15 UH L. Rev. 423.
Slow-Baked, Flash-Fried, Not to be Devoured: Development of the Partnership Model of Property Division in Hawaii and Beyond. 20 UH L. Rev. 1.
Hawaii Legal Reporter Citations
Antenuptial agreement reviewable by court. 79 HLR 79-0865.
Property settlement between unmarried couple. 82-1 HLR 820253.
Pre-nuptial agreements. 82-1 HLR 820387.
Death of former husband does not preclude appeal by divorced wife where property rights are involved.10 Haw. 117, 121. Amount of alimony rests in sound discretion of trial court and is subject to modification for cogent reasons only.10 Haw. 183;35 Haw. 382;41 Haw. 345. Granting of alimony is ancillary to granting of divorce.14 Haw. 152. In estimating amount not necessary to consult tables of mortality and annuities.14 Haw. 152. Provisions of statute are broader than "alimony" as known to common law.13 Haw. 654. Allowance in gross may be made for wife on decree for adultery of husband.13 Haw. 654;33 Haw. 690. To wife of leper.33 Haw. 268. Alimony in gross: when warranted, computation.40 Haw. 644. No alimony on divorce for desertion by wife.21 Haw. 264. Failure to provide is an offense amounting to adultery.19 Haw. 326. Jurisdiction, specific property.31 Haw. 603. Foreign judgment.40 Haw. 397, 416. Habeas corpus, children, divorce pending.32 Haw. 731. Contempt.30 Haw. 80; 32 H. 567, 604. Allowance to wife of attorney's fees upon appeal.38 Haw. 233. Attorney fees.40 Haw. 179;40 Haw. 315, 324. Support may be awarded at a date later than the decree.23 Haw. 281. Judge may modify decree respecting alimony upon proper showing.23 Haw. 639, 643;34 Haw. 237;39 Haw. 245. See also on modifying decree. 29 H. 866;30 Haw. 652;31 Haw. 574. As to where amount held to be clearly excessive and time too short to pay.14 Haw. 152. Settlement agreements, power of divorce judge to modify.41 Haw. 89. Child support orders, modification thereof, court's inherent power over welfare of child.52 Haw. 480,478 P.2d 852. Under L 1955, c 77, court has the power on granting divorce to make property settlements between the parties of all property, real, personal or mixed, howsoever held.42 Haw. 279. Division of property: "Respective merits of parties" construed: meritorious claim not established.44 Haw. 491,355 P.2d 188. Decree affirmed when within reasonable discretion of trial court. 49 Hawai'i. 258, 262,414 P.2d 82;49 Haw. 576,424 P.2d 671. Upon granting divorce, court may order party to maintain his former wife and children as beneficiaries under the state retirement system.52 Haw. 357,477 P.2d 620. In making property settlement, court may order conveyance of real property.54 Haw. 60,502 P.2d 380. Complex arrangements imposed by court indicate that financial situation was considered.56 H. 295,535 P.2d 1109. Divorce court in one state does not have power to directly affect, by decree, title to real property in another state.56 Haw. 295,535 P.2d 1109. The express reservation of custody and support questions does not impair the finality of divorce decree.57 Haw. 519,559 P.2d 744. Division of interests in corporate stock.58 Haw. 98,564 P.2d 1274. Division of property is discretionary with the trial court and will not be disturbed unless abuse of discretion is clearly shown.58 Haw. 227,566 P.2d 1104. Division of property, standards for determining.58 Haw. 227,566 P.2d 1104. Whether interest in pension and retirement benefits is a property interest for purposes of property division depends upon the terms of the obligation securing payment.58 Haw. 541,574 P.2d 125. Cited as authority for family court to distribute the separate property of the parties.59 Haw. 32,575 P.2d 468. There is no conflict between this section and § 573-1.59 Haw. 32,575 P.2d 468. Agreement between parties concerning child support, validity of.59 H. 619,585 P.2d 1270. Court's jurisdiction over child support, nature of.59 Haw. 619,585 P.2d 1270. Court did not abuse its discretion in allowing each party to keep his separate estate where such award is fair under all circumstances.60 Haw. 354,590 P.2d 80. Alimony for educational purposes.61 Haw. 338,603 P.2d 564. Distribution of increase in value of separately owned interest in property; within discretion of family court to adjust for inflation in determining value of separate property.68 Haw. 383,716 P.2d 1133. Effect of premarital agreements in relation to spousal support and property division.69 Haw. 497,748 P.2d 1362. No presumption that nonowning spouse is not entitled to any part of appreciation of property legally owned by other spouse after declaration by either spouse that marriage has ended.70 Haw. 143,764 P.2d 1237. Where one of the divorced parties died before division of property, the family court was instructed to divide the property in accord with the premarital agreement, if valid, and enforceable, or effect a property division that is just and equitable.70 Haw. 605,780 P.2d 80. Uniform starting points, as mandated by intermediate court of appeals, violate section by restricting family courts' discretion in the equitable division and distribution of parties' estates; transmutation of property discussed.73 Haw. 470,836 P.2d 484. Allowing decree-judgment creditor to enforce collection in circuit court of installment property settlement payments did not usurp family court's exclusive jurisdiction over matters subject to modification by post-divorce decree.73 Haw. 566,836 P.2d 1081. Family court did not disregard any applicable rules or principles of law and did not improperly rely on uniform starting points in marital estate distribution; court's deviation from equal division of joint property was justified in light of wife's significant separate property holdings.76 Haw. 19,868 P.2d 437. Intellectual property is capable of division for purposes of equitable distribution.99 H. 101,53 P.3d 240. Trade secrets may be subject to equitable division pursuant to this section, depending upon when the right to the trade secret vested.99 Haw. 101,53 P.3d 240. An attorney-spouse's contingency fee cases are marital property subject to division; the family court may use the methodology outlined in this case in valuing attorney-husband's unliquidated contingency fee cases that were pending at the date of completion of evidentiary part of trial (DOCOEPOT); in the alternative, if husband had received contingency fees for those cases that were pending at DOCOEPOT, the family court may divide husband's net receivables by using a fractional apportionment based on the time husband put into the case during the marriage and the total amount of time husband expended to effectuate a recovery.121 Haw. 401 (App.),220 P.3d 264. Provision entitling receipt of rental payments in lieu of payments for spousal support is not a division of property. 1 H. App. 57,613 P.2d 363. Where payer is (1) unemployed or (2) working but earning less than he or she is capable of earning in other fields, court may consider what payer is capable of earning if payer attempts in good faith to secure proper employment. Court may also consider size of payer's estate and net worth. 1 H. App. 187,616 P.2d 1014. "Estate of the parties" construed; phrase includes nonvested military retirement benefits. 1 H. App. 272,618 P.2d 748. Single lump sum payment, representing plaintiff's interest in defendant's federal civil service retirement, may be awarded rather than a percentage of each monthly payment payable as and when received. 1 H. App. 288,618 P.2d 754. Power of family court to set aside its judgments (before court rules). 1 H. App. 315,619 P.2d 511. Financial assistance for adult children. 1 H. App. 324,619 P.2d 112. The source of an asset such as inheritance or gift, is one of the "circumstances of the case". 1 H. App. 324,619 P.2d 112. Where one party unilaterally transfers cash to the children during pendency of the divorce, it is not error for family court to credit the amount of the cash transferred to the party in the division of assets. 1 H. App. 324,619 P.2d 112. Foreign judgment; full faith and credit. 1 H. App. 496,621 P.2d 387. In reviewing the property settlement entered, the standard of review is whether the court below clearly abused its discretion. 1 H. App. 533,621 P.2d 984. Appropriateness of taking into account husband's current economic status, including his remarriage, in determining his obligation to his first family. 1 H. App. 581,623 P.2d 97. It was not error to receive evidence that wife was living with an adult male friend who was paying part of the living costs and that they planned to be married. 1 H. App. 595,623 P.2d 95. It was within the lower court's allowable discretion to divide the wife's inheritance from the husband's father. 1 H. App. 595,623 P.2d 95. Family court's division in the disposition of property will not be set aside unless there has been a manifest abuse of discretion. 1 H. App. 599,623 P.2d 890. Award of costs and attorney's fees. 1 H. App. 617,623 P.2d 1265. Factors that may be considered in dividing property. 1 H. App. 617,623 P.2d 1265. Not error to consider presence of wife's mother and resulting financial impact. 1 H. App. 617,623 P.2d 1265. Valuation of partnership. 2 H. App. 485,634 P.2d 1039. Division of property is res judicata, and any unfairness in that aspect of case is not relevant to spousal support issue; in support modification hearing, burden is on moving party to provide entitlement to modification; hearing is not a rehearing, but a new hearing based on changed circumstances; party receiving spousal support has duty to attain self-sufficiency and party paying spousal support has duty to maintain ability to pay support, neither may benefit from violation of that duty. 3 H. App. 20,641 P.2d 1342. Discretion in dividing property. 3 H. App. 602,658 P.2d 329; 4 H. App. 68,660 P.2d 529; 4 H. App. 333,666 P.2d 617. Equitable to award each party date of marriage net value of premarital property and date of acquisition net value of gifts and inheritances received during marriage. 3 H. App. 602,658 P.2d 329. Distribution of increase in value of separately owned interest in property. 4 H. App. 68,660 P.2d 529. Equitable to award each party one-half of net value of property jointly owned at time of divorce. 4 H. App. 68,660 P.2d 529. Antenuptial agreement not binding on court. 4 H. App. 333,666 P.2d 617. Manifest abuse of discretion in property division. 4 H. App. 652,672 P.2d 1044. Division of retirement benefits was equitable. 5 H. App. 55,677 P.2d 966. No error in disregarding conveyance of real property by husband to husband and wife as tenants by entirety. 5 H. App. 348,691 P.2d 771. If occupancy of residence by mother and children are a combination of spousal and child support, termination of occupancy must be justified as to both spouse and children. 5 H. App. 385,695 P.2d 1194. Spousal support payable for indefinite period is subject to further court order. 6 H. App. 66,708 P.2d 143. Equitable to award each party one-half of real increase, during marriage, of net value of separately owned property; division of retirement benefits; factors to determine whether spousal support must be paid and the length and amount of payments. 6 H. App. 207,716 P.2d 1145. Categories of net market values for purposes of property division modified. 7 H. App. 11,740 P.2d 36. Antenuptial agreement binding if equitable; inequitable antenuptial agreement only one of factors considered regarding property division or spousal support; Hawaii's public policy as reflected in this section, takes precedence over parties' right to enforce their antenuptial agreement; no abuse of discretion in court's refusal to enforce antenuptial agreement. 7 H. App. 155,747 P.2d 698. Inequitable antenuptial agreement only one of factors to be considered regarding property division; property division terms of antenuptial agreement held inequitable when viewed at time of divorce. 7 H. App. 163,747 P.2d 703. The family court always has the discretion to award attorney's fees and costs to a party. 7 H. App. 266,752 P.2d 1079. "Estate of the parties" means anything of present or prospective value. 7 H. App. 377,768 P.2d 243. Three step process in dividing and distributing marital property discussed. 7 H. App. 430,776 P.2d 418. Husband's right to receive veterans' and military disability pay cannot be used as the basis to award wife equal cash value in division of property. 7 H. App. 496,780 P.2d 581. Cannot be used against a person who has refused to become legally married. 8 H. App. 215,797 P.2d 74. Uniform starting point and other uniform categories are only processes for the family courts to consider, courts must still exercise a wide range of choices and equitable discretion when deciding divorce cases. 8 H. App. 415,807 P.2d 597. Where record contained insufficient relevant circumstances prior to entry of initial child support order, proof of sufficient relevant circumstances existing at time of modification hearing was conclusive proof of a material change in circumstances. 8 H. App. 437,809 P.2d 449. Family court overemphasized marriage and underemphasized relative abilities of parties and condition in which each party would be left by divorce in division and distribution of net market value of marital property; discussion of deviation from applicable uniform starting point, when authorized. 9 H. App. 1,818 P.2d 277. Section gave family court discretion to enter conclusion of law regarding payment of attorney's fees and costs. 9 H. App. 184,828 P.2d 1291. If all relevant and valid considerations equal, deviation from partnership model not justified.80 Haw. 79 (App.),905 P.2d 54. Court properly excluded testimony of wife's alleged pecuniary purpose for marrying husband and her TRO against lover where no evidence that alleged premarital intentions or extramarital relationship negatively affected accumulation or preservation of husband's separate property.80 Haw. 274 (App.),909 P.2d 602. If decree or order finally obtained by offeree after hearing is patently not more favorable as a whole than settlement offer, Hawaii family court rule 68 requires offeree to pay costs, including reasonable attorney fees incurred after making of offer, unless court determines such would be inequitable under this section.82 Haw. 539 (App.),923 P.2d 956. Adoption of 1988 child support guidelines constituted a change in circumstances sufficient to permit review under subsection (c) of 1983 support order.87 Haw. 209 (App.),953 P.2d 968. Where child support proceeding commenced when mother filed complaint for divorce, child support enforcement agency's motion for modification of child support payments filed twelve years later was "continuation of proceeding", and, under § 580-3.5 and this section, court had continuing jurisdiction over non-Hawaii domiciliary father.87 Haw. 209 (App.),953 P.2d 968. Where father offered no evidence to support an exceptional circumstance deviation, father failed to overcome presumption that support obligation calculated by using amended child support guidelines was the amount that should be ordered.87 Haw. 209 (App.),953 P.2d 968. It is within family court's discretion to order custodial parent to pay all or part of interstate transportation expenses incurred by children when visiting noncustodial parent if order can be complied with without decreasing funds reasonably necessary to support children and custodial parent at relevant standard of living.87 Haw. 369 (App.),956 P.2d 1301. Once it is determined that a divorce decree award obtained by an offeree is patently not more favorable as a whole than a HFCR rule 68 settlement offer, the trial court must determine whether it would be inequitable to award attorney's fees and costs under rule 68 to the offeror, applying the standards of subsection (f).89 Haw. 17 (App.),968 P.2d 184. Relevant statutes, rules, and precedent did not permit wife to directly attack in circuit court the validity of the property and distribution part of the divorce decree; circuit court did not have subject matter jurisdiction under § 603-21.5 to do what wife must have had done to obtain the relief wife sought; pursuant to § 580-1 and this section, only the family court could have granted that relief.101 Haw. 370 (App.),68 P.3d 644. The family court may and should consider regular and consistent monetary gifts received by a spouse as part of the spouse's actual financial resources, condition and ability when determining spousal support; pursuant to subsection (d), if and when husband's parents materially reduce their regular and consistent monetary gifts to husband, husband may allege a material change in circumstance and ask the family court for a review of its orders.112 Haw. 437 (App.),146 P.3d 597. Where the family court determined that there were valid and relevant considerations authorizing a deviation from the partnership model division, and the family court's extensive findings of fact clearly showed that in dividing and distributing husband and wife's assets and debts, the court took into consideration the conditions each would be left in after their divorce, court did not violate this section.120 Haw. 283 (App.),205 P.3d 548. Cited:14 Haw. 554, 564;26 Haw. 128, 130;29 Haw. 464, 470; 44 Hawai'i. 442, 451,355 P.2d 33. Mentioned:85 Haw. 108 (App.),937 P.2d 949.
Dower, none in case of divorce, see § 533-9 .