Navatek Capital, Inc. v. Kao

CourtHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
DecidedMay 8, 2025
DocketCAAP-24-0000476
StatusPublished

This text of Navatek Capital, Inc. v. Kao (Navatek Capital, Inc. v. Kao) 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.

Bluebook
Navatek Capital, Inc. v. Kao, (hawapp 2025).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 08-MAY-2025 07:57 AM Dkt. 61 ORD NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

NAVATEK CAPITAL, INC., individually and derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant PACMAR TECHNOLOGIES LLC, fka MARTIN DEFENSE GROUP LLC, fka NAVATEK LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARTIN KAO, Defendant/Cross-claim Defendant-Appellant, and JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-5; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10; DOE ENTITIES 1-10; and DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS 1-10, Defendants, and PACMAR TECHNOLOGIES LLC, fka MARTIN DEFENSE GROUP LLC, fka NAVATEK LLC, Nominal Defendant/Cross-claimant-Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CIVIL NO. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)

ORDER (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and McCullen, JJ.) Upon consideration of Plaintiff-Appellee Navatek Capital Inc., individually and derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant PACMAR Technologies LLC, fka Martin Defense Group, LLC, fka Navatek LLC's October 15, 2024 Motion to Partially Dismiss Appeal, the papers in support, the record, and there being no opposition, it appears that PACMAR seeks to dismiss the appeal in part for lack of jurisdiction. According to Defendant-Appellant Martin Kao's (Kao) July 15, 2024 Notice of Appeal, he appeals from the following post-judgment orders entered in the Circuit Court of the First Circuit: March 15, 2023 Order Granting Nominal Defendant PACMAR Technologies LLC, fka Martin Defense Group LLC, fka Navatek LLC's Ex Parte Motion for Issuance of Garnishee Summons After Judgment [Michelle Chapman]; NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

September 5, 2023 Order Denying Defendant/ Respondent Martin Kao's Motion to Quash Garnishee Summons Directed to Michelle Chapman (Dkt 707) and/or to Discharge or Release Garnishee;

December 12, 2023 Order Granting Nominal Defendant PACMAR Technologies LLC's Motion for Instructions on (1) Garnishee Order [Michelle Chapman] and (2) Garnishee Order [Geremy Robinson] [(December 12, 2023 Order)];

January 31, 2024 Order Denying Tiffany Jennifer Lam's Non Hearing Motion to Intervene Filed as Dkt. 840 on October 11, 2023 [(January 31, 2024 Order)];

March 27, 2024 Order to Show Cause Why Defendant Martin Kao Should not be Held in Civil Contempt for Knowingly Violating this Court's Orders, and for Sanctions;

May 2, 2024 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Granting Nominal Defendant PACMAR Technologies LLC's Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why Defendant Martin Kao, Should Not be Held in Civil Contempt for Knowingly Violating This Court's Orders and for Sanctions [(May 2, 2024 Order)]; and

June 14, 2024, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order Granting Nominal Defendant PACMAR Technologies LLC's Motion for Civil Contempt Sanctions Against Defendant Kao for Knowingly Violating this Court's Contemp Order [(June 14, 2024 Order)].

PACMAR contends each of the post-judgment orders from which Kao seeks to appeal were independently appealable when entered, but the Notice of Appeal was not timely-filed with respect to any those orders, except for the June 14, 2024 Order. "A post-judgment order is an appealable final order under [Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS)] § 641–1(a) if the order ends the proceedings, leaving nothing further to be accomplished." Ditto v. McCurdy, 103 Hawai i 153, 157, 80 P.3d 974, 978 (2003). The December 12, 2023 Order ended the post-judgment garnishment proceedings that were initiated by PACMAR's March 2, 2023 Ex Parte Motion for Issuance of Garnishee Summons After Judgment [Michelle Chapman], as it finally determined PACMAR's garnishment rights with respect to non-party Michelle Chapman, leaving nothing further to be accomplished. Familian Nw., Inc. v. Cent. Pac. Boiler & Piping, Ltd., 68 Haw. 368, 369, 714 P.2d 936, P.2d 938 (1986).

2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

The January 31, 2024 Order ended the post-judgment proceedings with respect to Non-Party Tiffany Jennifer Lam's October 11, 2023 Non-Hearing Motion to Intervene, as it finally decided all issues raised in that motion. The May 2, 2024 Order ended the post-judgment proceedings with respect to PACMAR's February 9, 2024 Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why [Kao] Should not Be Held in Civil Contempt for Knowingly Violating this Court's Orders and for Sanctions, as it finally decided all issues raised in that motion. The June 14, 2024 Order ended the post-judgment proceedings with respect to PACMAR's May 10, 2024 Motion for Civil Contempt Sanctions Against Defendant Kao for Knowingly Violating this Court's Contempt Order, as it finally decided all issues raised in that motion. Accordingly, each of the above- mentioned orders were independently-appealable under Ditto, and all other orders appealed from are interlocutory. Kao's July 15, 2024 Notice of Appeal was not timely- filed within thirty days of any of the above-mentioned except for the June 14, 2024 Order. Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 4(a)(1). "An appellant's failure to file a timely notice of appeal is a jurisdictional defect that can neither be waived by the parties nor disregarded by the court in the exercise of judicial discretion." Enos v. Pac. Transfer & Warehouse, Inc., 80 Hawai i 345, 349, 910 P.2d 116, 120 (1996). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Partially Dismiss Appeal is granted, and the appeal is dismissed as to the: 1. March 15, 2023 Order Granting Nominal Defendant PACMAR Technologies LLC, fka Martin Defense Group LLC, fka Navatek LLC's Ex Parte Motion for Issuance of Garnishee Summons After Judgment; 2. September 5, 2023 Order Denying Defendant/ Respondent Martin Kao's Motion to Quash Garnishee Summons Directed to Michelle Chapman (Dkt 707) and/or to Discharge or Release Garnishee;

3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

3. December 12, 2023 Order Granting Nominal Defendant PACMAR Technologies LLC's Motion for Instructions on (1) Garnishee Order [Michelle Chapman] and (2) Garnishee Order [Geremy Robinson]; 4. January 31, 2024 Order Denying Tiffany Jennifer Lam's Non Hearing Motion to Intervene Filed as Dkt. 840 on October 11, 2023; 5. March 27, 2024 Order to Show Cause Why Defendant Martin Kao Should not be Held in Civil Contempt for Knowingly Violating this Court's Orders, and for Sanctions; and 6. May 2, 2024 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Granting Nominal Defendant PACMAR Technologies LLC's Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why Defendant Martin Kao, Should not be Held in Civil Contempt for Knowingly Violating This Court's Orders and for Sanctions. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, May 8, 2025.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard Acting Chief Judge

/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Associate Judge

/s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen Associate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Enos v. Pacific Transfer & Warehouse, Inc.
910 P.2d 116 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1996)
Ditto v. McCurdy
80 P.3d 974 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Navatek Capital, Inc. v. Kao, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/navatek-capital-inc-v-kao-hawapp-2025.