Construction Accident Complaint - Hawaii

CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT COMPLAINT — HAWAII

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties
3. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Factual Allegations
5. Count I — Negligence
6. Count II — Premises Liability
7. Count III — OSHA Violations as Evidence of Negligence
8. Count IV — Third-Party Liability
9. Count V — Product Liability
10. Damages
11. Jury Demand
12. Verification and Signature

CAPTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE [FIRST / SECOND / THIRD / FIFTH] CIRCUIT
STATE OF HAWAII

[PLAINTIFF FULL NAME],

Plaintiff,

v. Civil No. [________________________________]

[GENERAL CONTRACTOR NAME],
[SUBCONTRACTOR NAME],
[PROPERTY OWNER NAME],
[EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER NAME] (if applicable),

Defendants.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES — CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, [PLAINTIFF FULL NAME], by and through undersigned counsel, and for this Complaint against the Defendants states as follows:

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF FULL NAME] is an individual residing at [PLAINTIFF ADDRESS], [CITY], Hawaii [ZIP CODE], who was employed as a [JOB TITLE/TRADE] at the time of the incident described herein.

2. Defendant [GENERAL CONTRACTOR NAME] ("General Contractor") is a [CORPORATION/LLC/PARTNERSHIP] organized under the laws of [STATE OF INCORPORATION], doing business in Hawaii, with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS], licensed under HRS Chapter 444.

3. Defendant [SUBCONTRACTOR NAME] ("Subcontractor") is a [CORPORATION/LLC/PARTNERSHIP] organized under the laws of [STATE OF INCORPORATION], doing business in Hawaii, with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS].

4. Defendant [PROPERTY OWNER NAME] ("Property Owner") is [AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDING AT / A CORPORATION WITH ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT] [ADDRESS].

5. Defendant [EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER NAME] ("Manufacturer") is a [CORPORATION/LLC/PARTNERSHIP] organized under the laws of [STATE OF INCORPORATION], with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS].

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action as it involves claims for damages arising from personal injuries occurring in the State of Hawaii.

7. Venue is proper in the [FIRST / SECOND / THIRD / FIFTH] Circuit pursuant to HRS § 603-37 because [SELECT ONE]:

☐ The injury occurred in this circuit
☐ One or more Defendants reside in this circuit

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

8. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant General Contractor was engaged as the general contractor for a construction project located at [PROJECT ADDRESS], [CITY], Hawaii [ZIP CODE] (the "Project Site").

9. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Property Owner owned, controlled, and/or maintained the Project Site.

10. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Subcontractor was engaged by the General Contractor to perform [DESCRIPTION OF SUBCONTRACTED WORK] at the Project Site.

11. Plaintiff was employed by [PLAINTIFF'S EMPLOYER NAME] as a [JOB TITLE/TRADE] and was assigned to work at the Project Site.

12. On or about [DATE OF ACCIDENT], at approximately [TIME], Plaintiff was performing [DESCRIPTION OF WORK ACTIVITY] at the Project Site when [DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ACCIDENT].

13. As a direct and proximate result of the accident, Plaintiff sustained severe and permanent injuries including but not limited to [DESCRIPTION OF INJURIES].

Safety Violations

14. At the time of the accident, the following safety violations existed at the Project Site:

☐ Failure to provide adequate fall protection
☐ Failure to erect proper scaffolding in compliance with OSHA standards
☐ Failure to provide proper safety equipment and/or personal protective equipment
☐ Failure to adequately train workers on safety procedures
☐ Failure to conduct safety inspections
☐ Failure to maintain equipment in safe working condition
☐ Failure to comply with applicable OSHA regulations (29 CFR 1926)
☐ Other: [DESCRIBE]

COUNT I — NEGLIGENCE

15. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

16. Defendants owed a duty of reasonable care to Plaintiff to maintain the Project Site in a reasonably safe condition.

17. Defendants breached their duty of care by:

a. Failing to implement and enforce adequate safety measures;
b. Failing to provide proper fall protection and safety equipment;
c. Failing to inspect and maintain the worksite;
d. Failing to warn of known hazards;
e. Failing to supervise construction work in a safe manner;
f. [ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC ACTS OF NEGLIGENCE].

18. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' negligence, Plaintiff suffered severe injuries and damages.

COUNT II — PREMISES LIABILITY

19. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

20. Defendant Property Owner owed a duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition for all persons lawfully on the property.

21. Defendant Property Owner knew or should have known of the dangerous conditions and failed to correct, remediate, or warn.

22. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff suffered severe injuries and damages.

COUNT III — OSHA VIOLATIONS AS EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE

23. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

24. At all relevant times, Defendants were required to comply with applicable OSHA standards, including:

a. 29 CFR § 1926.451 (Scaffolding);
b. 29 CFR § 1926.501 (Fall Protection);
c. 29 CFR § 1926.502 (Fall Protection Systems);
d. 29 CFR § 1926.20 (General Safety and Health Provisions);
e. [ADDITIONAL APPLICABLE OSHA STANDARDS].

25. Defendants violated the above-referenced OSHA standards, which constitutes evidence of negligence and breach of the standard of care.

26. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' violations, Plaintiff suffered severe injuries and damages.

COUNT IV — THIRD-PARTY LIABILITY

27. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

28. Pursuant to HRS § 386-8, while workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy against the employer, an injured employee may bring a third-party action against non-employer tortfeasors, including general contractors, property owners, and subcontractors who are not the plaintiff's direct employer.

29. Defendants [NAMES] are not Plaintiff's direct employer and are therefore subject to third-party liability.

30. As a direct and proximate result of these Defendants' negligent acts and/or omissions, Plaintiff suffered severe injuries and damages.

COUNT V — PRODUCT LIABILITY (IF APPLICABLE)

31. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

32. Defendant Manufacturer designed, manufactured, distributed, and/or sold the [DESCRIPTION OF EQUIPMENT/PRODUCT] that was in use at the Project Site.

33. The [PRODUCT] was defective in its [DESIGN / MANUFACTURE / MARKETING (FAILURE TO WARN)] and was unreasonably dangerous.

34. The defect in the [PRODUCT] was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

35. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff suffered severe injuries and damages.

DAMAGES

36. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' acts and/or omissions, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer the following damages:

a. Medical Expenses: Past and future medical expenses in an amount to be proven at trial;
b. Lost Wages: Past and future lost wages and loss of earning capacity;
c. Pain and Suffering: Physical pain and mental anguish, past and future;
d. Disability: Permanent disability and/or disfigurement;
e. Loss of Consortium: [SPOUSE'S NAME] has been deprived of the companionship, society, and consortium of Plaintiff;
f. Punitive Damages: Defendants intended harm, recklessly disregarded a substantial risk of harm, or otherwise acted outrageously or maliciously, warranting punitive damages upon the clear-and-convincing proof required by Guieb v. Guieb, 571 P.3d 382 (Haw. 2025);
g. Other: [ADDITIONAL DAMAGES AS APPLICABLE].

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in Plaintiff's favor and against Defendants for:

a. Economic damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
b. Non-economic damages as allowed by law;
c. Punitive damages as allowed by law;
d. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest;
e. Costs of this action;
f. Attorney's fees as allowed by law;
g. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

VERIFICATION AND SIGNATURE

Respectfully submitted this [____] day of [__________], [________].

[________________________________]
[ATTORNEY NAME], Esq.
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[CITY], Hawaii [ZIP CODE]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]
Hawaii Bar No. [________________________________]
Attorney for Plaintiff

STATE-SPECIFIC NOTES — HAWAII

Modified Comparative Negligence: In a negligence action within HRS § 663-31, recovery is barred only if the plaintiff's negligence is greater than the negligence of the defendant or, when recovery is sought against more than one person, the aggregate negligence of those persons. Any allowed damages are reduced proportionally.

Non-Economic Damages Cap: HRS § 663-8.7 caps non-economic damages at $375,000, with certain exceptions under HRS § 663-10.9(2).

Workers' Compensation / Third-Party Actions: HRS § 386-8 permits injured employees to both claim workers' compensation and pursue third-party actions. Employer/insurer has subrogation and reimbursement rights.

Construction Design Professional Immunity: HRS § 386-8.5 provides immunities for construction design professionals unless they contractually assumed safety responsibilities.

Statute of Limitations: HRS § 657-7 generally requires an action seeking compensation for injury to a person or property within two (2) years after accrual, subject to § 657-13. Determine accrual and any claim- or defendant-specific rule.

Scaffolding/Elevation: Hawaii has no specific scaffolding or elevation liability statute comparable to NY Labor Law § 240.

Key Case Law: Moranz v. Harbor Mall, LLC (Haw. 2022); Alvarado v. Kiewit Pacific Co., 92 Haw. 515 (2000).

This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It should be reviewed and customized by a licensed Hawaii attorney before filing. All statutory citations should be verified for current applicability.