I appreciate you looking it up. It can be found at https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0014_0003.htm
Please note this part:
“(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.”
Also, this is required to be done in accordance with HRS 338-18, which says, “(f) The department of health shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is...”
The verification is in lieu of a certified copy of the certificate.
In the USA, one state does not have to recognize the documents of another unless it is properly certified, according to the fleshing out of the US Constitution’s “Full Faith and Credit Clause”.
Basically a document that isn’t certified can’t be used in another state to verify anything. If a letter of verification is to be “certification” of anything, it has to be certified.
Yes I understand what you wrote about Section 338. I think our replies are getting crossed. But I don’t understand your reference to the full faith and credit clause. Where is the requirement that a document issued by a state must be certified by that state in order to be recognized by another state? I don’t see a certification on my driver license. I don’t see any requirement that a document from one state to be relied on by another state must be certified. Aside from financial implications of the full faith and credit clause, I find it applies to acts of legislation and judicial proceedings.