Why It Matters
A Hawaii court ruling on legal fees from the Maui wildfire settlement could shape how much money ultimately reaches the survivors and families of the 102 people killed when a Hawaiian Electric Co. power line ignited the August 2023 blaze that destroyed much of Lahaina. The fee decision directly affects how the historic $4.03 billion settlement is distributed among victims.
What Happened
Hawaiʻi Circuit Judge Peter Cahill issued an order capping attorneys’ fees at $222 million — roughly a fifth of what the lawyers had requested. The plaintiffs’ attorneys had sought $1 billion in fees from the settlement fund, a figure the judge declined to award.
Cahill set tiered rates depending on when attorneys enrolled their clients. Lawyers who brought clients into the litigation before any settlement was reached will receive 8.33% in fees, while those who signed clients up after a settlement was in place will collect 3%. Attorneys whose cases were formally scheduled for trial before settlement was reached may receive up to 10%.
By the Numbers
The overall settlement of $4.03 billion draws from multiple sources. Hawaiian Electric Co. and its parent company contributed the largest share at $1.99 billion. Kamehameha Schools’ trust added $807.5 million, while Hawaii taxpayers are on the hook for approximately $800 million. The remaining funds came from Maui County, telecommunications companies, and entities tied to landowner Peter Martin.
Separately, insurers that paid out $2.3 billion in wildfire claims agreed to walk away retaining only 10 cents on the dollar — forgoing roughly $2 billion in potential subrogation recovery to help maximize the pool available to victims.
The judge’s $222 million fee award represents a reduction of more than $778 million from what attorneys had sought.
Zoom Out
The Lahaina disaster stands as one of the deadliest wildfires in U.S. history in recent decades, and the resulting litigation is among the largest wildfire settlement cases the country has seen. Judicial oversight of legal fees in large multi-party tort settlements has become an increasingly prominent issue nationally, with courts in several high-profile cases applying heightened scrutiny to fee requests that critics argue consume resources meant for victims.
In Hawaii, the case has also raised broader questions about public accountability — including the $800 million taxpayer contribution — and the role of public utilities in wildfire risk. For context on how local government institutions are navigating community accountability issues in Hawaii, see our coverage of a Honolulu charter proposal seeking to define limits on police conduct in immigration enforcement and the Hawaii governor’s pledge to address legislation affecting Honolulu park programs.
What’s Next
With the fee question now resolved, the focus shifts to distributing the settlement funds to the thousands of claimants who lost homes, businesses, and family members in the fire. The tiered fee structure means the pace and timing of client enrollment by individual law firms will affect what each attorney ultimately collects.
Attorney Jesse Creed, who supported the judge’s approach, said he viewed the ruling as an act of fairness toward a community still recovering from catastrophic loss. “I feel like Judge Cahill has been guided by fairness to the community from the outset of the litigation,” Creed said. He added that victims themselves were bearing the heaviest burden, saying, “The residents are doing the biggest sacrifice of all.”
The settlement process is expected to continue in the months ahead as individual claims are evaluated and disbursements are calculated, with the court continuing to oversee the administration of one of the largest disaster-related civil settlements in Hawaiian history.