HI · jury_instructions
Haw. Civil Jury Instr. 16.24
INTENT MAY BE INFERRED
You may infer intent to discriminate from proof that
similarly situated employees outside the protected category
received better treatment than plaintiff(s). “Similarly
situated” employees are generally those employees who are
subject to the same policies and subordinate to the same
decision-maker as plaintiff(s). Plaintiff(s) must prove that
all of the relevant aspects of his/her/their employment
situation were similar to those employees with whom he/she/they
seek(s) to compare his/her/their treatment.
Furukawa v. Honolulu Zoological Society, 85 Hawaiʻi, 7, 14–15,
936 P.2d 643, 650–51 (1997).
Provenance
- Source
- courts.state.hi.us
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- 2026-08-20
- Content hash
13c544730f76fd118b8f7751af853baf460d2a640a9c79f7093b40904961a68a
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.