Background
Keaka Martin, an incarcerated person proceeding without counsel, sued the Hawai‘i Department of Public Safety (DPS) for negligence. He alleged that DPS failed to ensure his physical presence at an October 2020 hearing concerning his criminal case and, after he tested positive for COVID-19, failed to provide adequate medical care and protect him from hazardous conditions.
The Circuit Court of the First Circuit granted summary judgment for DPS on Martin’s COVID-related claims because he had not first submitted an inquiry to Hawai‘i’s medical inquiry and conciliation panel under HRS chapter 671. After discovery, the court also granted DPS summary judgment on the judicial-access claim and entered final judgment.
The Court’s Holding
The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed. Martin’s allegations that medical professionals inadequately treated him after his positive COVID-19 test, including by failing to provide proper care and medical attention, were medical-tort claims under HRS § 671-1. Because he did not submit those claims to the medical inquiry and conciliation panel before suing, the circuit court lacked jurisdiction over them.
Martin did not explain in his opening brief why the circuit court erred in dismissing his separate hazardous-conditions claim, so that argument was waived. The court also affirmed summary judgment on the judicial-access claim because Martin did not establish a right to be physically present at the October 2020 hearing or provide authority supporting a negligence claim based on DPS’s failure to transport him there.
Key Takeaways
- Claims alleging inadequate professional medical treatment must satisfy HRS chapter 671’s pre-suit medical-inquiry requirement.
- A party that does not develop an appellate argument challenging a ruling risks waiver.
- An incarcerated plaintiff must identify a legal basis for a claim that prison officials denied judicial access by failing to transport the plaintiff to a hearing.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that the substance of a claim, rather than its label, controls whether Hawai‘i’s medical-tort screening procedure applies. Allegations of deficient care by medical professionals are subject to HRS chapter 671’s pre-suit requirements.
It also illustrates the importance of supporting each appellate issue with argument and legal authority, including for self-represented litigants.