Goold v. Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc.
This text of Goold v. Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (Goold v. Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 31-MAR-2023 08:24 AM Dkt. 113 OGMD
NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I
JEFFREY SCOTT GOOLD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC.; HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC INDUSTRIES, INC.; ELIZABETH DEER; SHANA M. BUCO, Defendants-Appellees, and JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10; DOE ENTITIES 1-10; and DOE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CIVIL NO. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL (By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, McCullen and Chan, JJ.) Upon consideration of self-represented Plaintiff-
Appellant Jeffrey Scott Goold's (Goold) March 2, 2023 Notice of
Withdrawal Under Objection, which the court construes as a motion
to dismiss the appeal under Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure
(HRAP) Rule 42(b)1 (Motion), the papers in support, and the
record, it appears that:
1 Though Goold states that he does not wish to dismiss the appeal, but rather, to give notice that he "withdraws" it under objection, there is no rule in the HRAP permitting an appellant to unilaterally withdraw an appeal by giving notice, or to move to dismiss an appeal "under objection." Indeed, Goold seeks—in substance—to abandon his appeal, and "it is the substance of a motion that should control rather than the title." Khaleghi v. Indymac Ventures, LLC, No. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, 2016 WL 4268709, at *4 (App. Aug. 11, 2016) (Mem.). NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
(1) The appeal has been docketed;
(2) Goold seeks to abandon his appeal;
(3) All appearing parties agree to a dismissal; and
(4) Dismissal of the appeal is authorized by HRAP
Rule 42(b).
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is
granted and the appeal is dismissed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are
dismissed.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, March 31, 2023.
/s/ Katherine G. Leonard Presiding Judge
/s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen Associate Judge
/s/ Derrick H.M. Chan Associate Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Goold v. Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goold-v-hawaiian-electric-company-inc-hawapp-2023.