Limitations on action

Cross References Actions on contract for loss in connection with registered land, see §501-217. Case Notes Court on own motion will dismiss action if not brought within time limited, namely, two years. 11 H. 404 (1898). Claim accrues when the plaintiff knew or should have known that an actionable wrong has been committed. 63 H. 117, 621 P.2d 957 (1980). Lawsuit seeking judicial review of employees' retirement system declaratory order not time-barred. 75 H. 42, 856 P.2d 1227 (1993). Where employees' retirement system trustees were alleging in lawsuit that Act 100, L 1999 was unconstitutional as being violative of article XVI, §2 of the Hawaii constitution, their claims were not "founded upon any statute of the State; or upon any regulation of an executive department; or upon any contract" and were not referred to the court by the legislature; thus, trustees' claims were not cognizable under chapter 661, and, therefore, were not subject to the statute of limitations set forth in this section. 114 H. 302, 162 P.3d 696 (2007). The circuit court did not err in summarily ruling that this section barred claims against the State for back pay prior to November 8, 2000 where there was nothing in the record to indicate why plaintiffs could not have brought their claims within the two-year statute of limitations period and there was no "extraordinary circumstance". 122 H. 150 (App.), 223 P.3d 215 (2009). Under the "continuing tort doctrine", while the statute of limitations is "tolled" by a continuing tortious act, recovery may be had only for damages accruing within the statutory period before the action, but not for damages accrued prior to that period; thus, the statute of limitations applicable to periodic pay claims begins to run on each paycheck as it becomes due and plaintiffs' claims for back pay due prior to November 8, 2000 were barred by this section, but their claims for pay due from that date onward were not barred by the statute of limitations. 122 H. 150 (App.), 223 P.3d 215 (2009).