For the City & County of Honolulu, it is against the law for a dog to bark constantly for 10 minutes, or 30 minutes on and off, to the disturbance of others. However, it shall not be deemed to be an animal nuisance if, at the time the animal is making any noise, a person is trespassing or threatening trespass upon property in or upon which the animal is situated, or for any other legitimate cause that teased or provoked the animal.
HAWAII law to leave a trust for your pet(s).
Citation: HI ST § 560:7-501
This statute represents Hawaii’s pet trust law. The law provides that a pet trust is a valid purpose for a trust, and that such instruments are to be liberally construed to carry out the intent of the pet owner. Extrinsic evidence is admissible to prove the transferor’s intent. Other aspects include an order for disbursement of remaining assets and a section that excludes these trusts from Hawaii’s rule against perpetuities law.
Statute in Full:
(a) A trust for the care of one or more designated domestic or pet animals shall be valid. The trust terminates when no living animal is covered by the trust. A governing instrument shall be liberally construed to bring the transfer within this section, to presume against the precatory or honorary nature of its disposition, and to carry out the general intent of the transferor. Extrinsic evidence shall be admissible in determining the transferor’s intent.
(b) A trust for the care of one or more designated domestic or pet animals shall be subject to the following provisions:
(1) Except as expressly provided otherwise in the instrument creating the trust, and notwithstanding section 554A-3, no portion of the principal or income of the trust may be converted to the use of the trustee or to a use contrary to the trust’s purposes or for the benefit of a covered animal;
(2) Upon termination, the trustee shall transfer the unexpended trust property in the following order:
(A) As directed in the trust instrument;
(B) If there is no such direction in the trust instrument and if the trust was created in a non-residuary clause in the transferor’s will, then under the residuary clause in the transferor’s will; and
(C) If no taker is produced by the application of subparagraph (A) or (B), then to the transferor’s heirs, determined according to section 560:2-711;
(3) The intended use of the principal or income may be enforced by an individual designated for that purpose in the trust instrument or, if none, by an individual appointed by a court having jurisdiction over the matter and parties, upon petition by an individual;
(4) Except as ordered by the court or required by the trust instrument, no filing, report, registration, periodic accounting, separate maintenance of funds, appointment, or fee shall be required by reason of the existence of the fiduciary relationship of the trustee;
(5) The court may reduce the amount of the property transferred if it determines that the amount substantially exceeds the amount required for the intended use and the court finds that there will be no substantial adverse impact in the care, maintenance, health, or appearance of the designated domestic or pet animal. The amount of the reduction, if any, shall pass as unexpended trust property under paragraph (2);
(6) If a trustee is not designated or no designated trustee is willing and able to serve, the court shall name a trustee. The court may order the transfer of the property to another trustee if the transfer is necessary to ensure that the intended use is carried out and if a successor is not designated in the trust instrument or if no designated successor trustee agrees to serve and is able to serve. The court may also make other orders and determinations as are advisable to carry out the intent of the transferor and the purpose of this section; and
(7) The trust is exempt from the operation of chapter 525, the Uniform Statutory Rule Against Perpetuities Act.
(L 2005, c 160, § 1)
(2) The use of the animal to cause damage to person or property was justified under chapter 703. [L 1980, c 218, §3; gen ch 1985]
statute referred to is HRS section 663-9:
Section 663-9 (Liability of animal owners)
(a) The owner or harborer of an animal, if the animal proximately causes either personal or property damage to any person, shall be liable in damages to the person injured regardless of the animal owner’s or harborer’s lack of scienter of the vicious or dangerous propensities of the animal.
(b) The owner or harborer of an animal which is known by its species or nature to be dangerous, wild, or vicious, if the animal proximately causes either personal or property damage to any person, shall be absolutely liable for such damage. [L 1980, c 218, §2]
Section 663-9.1 (Exception of animal owners to civil liability)
(a) As used in this section:
(1) “Premises” includes any building or portion thereof or any real property owned, leased, or occupied by the owner or harborer of an animal.
(2) “Enter or remain unlawfully” means to be in or upon premises when the person is not licensed, invited, or otherwise privileged to be upon the premises. A person is not licensed or privileged to enter or remain in or upon a premises if a warning or warnings have been posted reasonably adequate to warn other persons that an animal is present on the premises. A person who, regardless of the person’s intent, enters or remains in or upon premises which are at the time open to the public does so with license and privilege unless the person defies a lawful order not to enter or remain, personally communicated to the person by the owner of the premises or some other authorized person. A license or privilege to enter or remain in a building which is only partly open to the public is not a license or privilege to enter or remain in that part of the building which is not open to the public. A person who enters or remains upon unimproved and apparently unused land, which is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders, does so with license and privilege unless notice against trespass is personally communicated to the person by the owner of the land or some other authorized person, or unless notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner.
(3) The definitions of “intentionally” and “knowingly” as contained in sections 702-206(1) and 702-206(2) shall apply.
(b) Notwithstanding sections 663-1 and 663-9, any owner or harborer of an animal shall not be liable for any civil damages resulting from actions of the animal occurring in or upon the premises of the owner or harborer where the person suffering either personal or property damage as a proximate result of the actions of the animal is found by the trier of fact intentionally or knowingly to have entered or remained in or upon such premises unlawfully.
(c) Notwithstanding sections 663-1 and 663-9, any owner or harborer of an animal shall not be liable for any civil damages resulting from actions of the animal where the trier of fact finds that:
(1) The animal caused such damage as a proximate result of being teased, tormented, or otherwise abused without the negligence, direction, or involvement of the owner or harborer; or
(2) The use of the animal to cause damage to person or property was justified under chapter 703. [L 1980, c 218, §3; gen ch 1985; am L 2017, c 12, §71]