Santa Monica v. Wong

CourtHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 18, 2026
DocketCAAP-25-0000569
StatusPublished

This text of Santa Monica v. Wong (Santa Monica v. Wong) 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
Santa Monica v. Wong, (hawapp 2026).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 18-JUN-2026 07:59 AM Dkt. 16 ODSD

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

SERINA M. SANTA MONICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. WILLIAM WONG; MEGAN WONG; STANLEY WONG; GOLDEN WONG; KONA WONG, Defendants-Appellees, and TREENA: APOSTADIRO KAHAKUAKOI, Interested Party-Appellant, and ALL THOSE TAKING UNDER THEM, DOES 1-50, Defendants.

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT LĪHUʻE DIVISION (CASE NO. 5DRC-XX-XXXXXXX)

ORDER (By: Nakasone, Chief Judge, Wadsworth and Gluck, JJ.)

Upon review of the record, it appears that: (1) The statement of jurisdiction and opening brief were due on or before October 23, 2025, and December 24, 2025, respectively; (2) Self-represented Interested Party-Appellant Treena: Apostadiro Kahakuakoi (Kahakuakoi) failed to file either document or request an extension of time; NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

(3) On December 30, 2025, the appellate clerk entered a default notice informing Kahakuakoi 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 January 9, 2026, for appropriate action, which could include dismissal of the appeal, under Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rules 12.1(e) and 30, and Kahakuakoi could request relief from default by motion; (4) The appellate clerk mailed the notice of entering case on calendar and the default notice to Kahakuakoi at her address on record. The United States Postal Service returned the default notice as not deliverable and unable to forward; and (5) Kahakuakoi has not filed a notice of change of address, consistent with HRAP Rule 25(f), or taken any further action in this appeal since filing the notice of appeal. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, June 18, 2026. /s/ Karen T. Nakasone Chief Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth Associate Judge

/s/ Daniel M. Gluck Associate Judge

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Santa Monica v. Wong, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santa-monica-v-wong-hawapp-2026.