Rule 9 Publication of Notice

(a) COMMENTARY:

There have been and continues to be abuses in publication of notice. A clear statement of the permissible publications would eliminate possible constitutional challenges and uncertainty. The committee decided against endorsing any specific newspapers because of concern that they may not have sufficient circulation to be considered of general circulation in the judicial circuit. Publication in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser would be presumed to provide adequate notice in all judicial circuits of this state. Use of any other publication shall provide adequate notice only if approved in advance by the court in the order for notice.

(Commentary amended February 5, 2013, effective July 1, 2013.)

(b) COMMENTARY:

This formalizes the current practice.

(c) COMMENTARY:

This rule is intended to keep costs of administration down by providing guidelines for the content of published notice. Only the essential information necessary to provide adequate notice is to be included in the publication; law firm names, attorney license numbers, names of multiple attorneys, fax numbers, and the like should be eliminated. Capitalized words should be avoided, as they take up more space and result in higher publication costs. Phrases such as "the Honorable John Doe, Judge of the above entitled court" and "on Monday the 12th day of October, 1992" should be dropped in favor of "Judge John Doe" and "Oct. 12, 1992." The idea is to give the public sufficient information to know what is happening, when, and where, and who to contact for additional information. The general guideline is to keep it simple. Use of smaller fonts in the published notice might help to cut costs.