Schmidt v. Gearheart
This text of Schmidt v. Gearheart (Schmidt v. Gearheart) 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER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 29-APR-2025 08:13 AM Dkt. 44 ODSD NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I
THOMAS FRANK SCHMIDT, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant, v. JERE GEARHEART and DALE GEARHEART, Defendants/Counterclaimants/Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellees, and BRIGIDA A. SCHMIDT, Third-Party Defendant-Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CIVIL NO. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and McCullen, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that: (1) On July 25, 2024, the court dismissed the appeal filed by self-represented Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant- Appellant Thomas Schmidt from the Circuit Court of the First Circuit's March 4, 2024 "Final Judgment in Favor of Brigida A. Schmidt and Against Thomas Frank Schmidt" under Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rules 12.1(e) and 30 due to his default of the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief; (2) On August 9, 2024, the court granted Schmidt's request for reconsideration of the dismissal, reinstating the appeal, and extending the deadline for the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief to October 4, 2024; the court cautioned Schmidt that any further default of the statement of jurisdiction or opening brief may result in sanctions, including the appeal being dismissed; NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
(3) On October 4, 2024, the court further extended the deadline for the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief to November 18, 2024; and (4) Schmidt failed to file either document and has not taken any further action in this appeal. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, under HRAP Rules 12.1(e) and 30. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are dismissed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, April 29, 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Schmidt v. Gearheart, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schmidt-v-gearheart-hawapp-2025.