R.A v. M.M

Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals

R.A v. M.M

CourtHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 21, 2025

DocketCAAP-24-0000277

StatusPublished

This text of R.A v. M.M (R.A v. M.M) 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

R.A v. M.M, (hawapp 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 21-FEB-2025 03:41 PM Dkt. 43 ODSD NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

R.A., Petitioner-Appellant, v. M.M. and CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, STATE OF HAWAI I, Respondents-Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE FAMILY COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CASE NO. 1PP111006168)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Nakasone, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that: (1) On April 3, 2024, Petitioner-Appellant R.A. filed the notice of appeal; (2) The statement of jurisdiction was due, without extension, on or before June 3, 2024; (3) The opening brief was due on a third extension on or before September 30, 2024. Twice the court granted R.A. relief from default of the opening brief and cautioned R.A.'s counsel to timely file documents and that future violations may result in sanctions; (4) R.A. failed to file the statement of jurisdiction or the opening brief, or request another extension of time for the opening brief; (5) On October 4, 2024, the appellate clerk entered a default notice informing R.A. that the time for filing the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief had expired, the matter would be called to the court's attention on October 14, 2024, for appropriate action, which could include dismissal of NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

the appeal, under Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rules 12.1(e) and 30, and R.A. could request relief from default by motion; and (6) R.A. has not taken any further action in this appeal. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, February 21, 2025.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard Acting Chief Judge

/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Associate Judge

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone Associate Judge

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 21-FEB-2025 03:41 PM Dkt. 43 ODSD NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

R.A., Petitioner-Appellant, v. M.M. and CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, STATE OF HAWAI I, Respondents-Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE FAMILY COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CASE NO. 1PP111006168)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Nakasone, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that: (1) On April 3, 2024, Petitioner-Appellant R.A. filed the notice of appeal; (2) The statement of jurisdiction was due, without extension, on or before June 3, 2024; (3) The opening brief was due on a third extension on or before September 30, 2024. Twice the court granted R.A. relief from default of the opening brief and cautioned R.A.'s counsel to timely file documents and that future violations may result in sanctions; (4) R.A. failed to file the statement of jurisdiction or the opening brief, or request another extension of time for the opening brief; (5) On October 4, 2024, the appellate clerk entered a default notice informing R.A. that the time for filing the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief had expired, the matter would be called to the court's attention on October 14, 2024, for appropriate action, which could include dismissal of NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

the appeal, under Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rules 12.1(e) and 30, and R.A. could request relief from default by motion; and (6) R.A. has not taken any further action in this appeal. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, February 21, 2025.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard Acting Chief Judge

/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Associate Judge

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone Associate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

R.A v. M.M, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ra-v-mm-hawapp-2025.