§635-52 - Scope of argument. - Hawaii Statutes

     §635-52  Scope of argument.  At the close of the evidence (unless the court directs a verdict, or orders entry of a judgment of acquittal), the respective parties, or their counsel, shall be entitled to sum up the facts to the jury.  In their addresses to the jury they shall be allowed ample scope and latitude for argument upon, and illustration of any and all facts involved in the cause, and the evidence tending to either prove or disprove the same.  They shall not be forbidden to argue the law of the case to the jury, but they shall not assume to instruct the jury upon the law, in such manner as to encroach upon the function of the court to so instruct the jury.

     In all actions for damages for personal injuries or death the parties or their counsel shall be entitled to argue the extent of damages claimed or disputed in terms of suggested formulas for the computation of damages or by way of other illustration, and shall be entitled to state in argument the amount of damages the party believes appropriate. [L 1892, c 56, §8; RL 1925, §2425; RL 1935, §3741; RL 1945, §10121; RL 1955, §231-21; am L 1967, c 241, §1; HRS §635-52; am L 1972, c 89, §2B(m)]

 

Historical Note

 

  Background of last paragraph, see 47 H. 408, 390 P.2d 740; 48 H. 22, 395 P.2d 365.

 

Case Notes

 

  Counsel in argument may suggest lump sum amount for general damages and also may suggest fragmented segments of lump sum amounts if borne out by the evidence.  50 H. 89, 431 P.2d 931.

  Counsel may make formula arguments for damages in personal injury cases.  51 H. 383, 463 P.2d 917.

  Cited for rule that the court finds the law and instructs the jury thereon, including law of a treaty.  54 H. 450, 509 P.2d 1095.

  Where defendant sought to draw adverse inference from the failure by the prosecution to present a witness, prosecution was entitled to explain the nonproduction.  57 H. 150, 552 P.2d 357.

  On issue of amount of damages for violation of Fourth Amendment rights, plaintiff may argue the history of that Amendment to support plaintiff's claim.  57 H. 390, 557 P.2d 1334.