Rapp v. Schmidt

CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 16, 2025
DocketSCWC-23-0000327
StatusPublished

This text of Rapp v. Schmidt (Rapp v. Schmidt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rapp v. Schmidt, (haw 2025).

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX 16-OCT-2025 07:57 AM SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX Dkt. 20 ORD

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI ________________________________________________________________

JOHN RAPP, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

THOMAS F. SCHMIDT, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant

and

LORINNA J. SCHMIDT, Respondent/Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________ CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX; CASE NO. 1CC940000903)

ORDER (By: McKenna, Acting C.J., Eddins, Ginoza, and Devens, JJ., and Circuit Judge Drewyer, assigned by reason of vacancy)

The record reflects that Petitioner/Defendant- Appellant Thomas F. Schmidt (Schmidt) has filed two Applications for Writ of Certiorari in this matter. The first application was filed on October 14, 2025, before the Intermediate Court of Appeals had filed a judgment on appeal. See Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes § 602-59(a) (2017) and Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 36(b)(1) (eff. 2016). Schmidt’s second application was filed on October 15, 2025, after the Intermediate Court of Appeals filed its Judgment on Appeal earlier on the same date. Therefore, it is ordered that: A. Petitioner Schmidt’s first application for writ of certiorari, filed on October 14, 2025, is dismissed without prejudice to the filing of his second application. See HRAP Rule 40.1(a) (eff. 2023) (“The application shall be filed within 30 days after the filing of the intermediate court of appeals’ judgment on appeal or dismissal order, unless the time for filing the application is extended in accordance with this rule.”); B. Petitioner Schmidt’s second application for writ of certiorari, timely filed on October 15, 2025, is the operative application in this matter; and C. The time for filing a response under HRAP Rule 40.1(e) shall be calculated from the second application for writ of certiorari filed on October 15, 2025. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, October 16, 2025. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Todd W. Eddins /s/ Lisa M. Ginoza /s/ Vladimir P. Devens /s/ Michelle L. Drewyer

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Rapp v. Schmidt, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rapp-v-schmidt-haw-2025.