Stiner v. Bank of America

CourtHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 27, 2024
DocketCAAP-24-0000005
StatusPublished

This text of Stiner v. Bank of America (Stiner v. Bank of America) 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
Stiner v. Bank of America, (hawapp 2024).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 27-JUN-2024 07:59 AM Dkt. 71 ODSLJ NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

AIMEE STINER, Claimant-Appellant-Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, dba MERRILL LYNCH, Employer-Appellee-Appellee, and XL INSURANCE AMERICA, INC., adjusted by SEDGWICK, Insurance Carrier-Appellee-Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS APPEALS BOARD (CASE NO. AB 2023-038; DCD NO. 2-2022-165236)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and McCullen, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that self-

represented Claimant-Appellant-Appellant Aimee Stiner (Stiner)

appeals from the August 11, 2023 Order Denying Motion for Damages

(Denial Order) entered by the Labor and Industrial Relations

Appeals Board. Stiner filed her January 2, 2024 notice of appeal

more than 30 days after entry of the Denial Order, which is

outside of the deadline set forth in Hawaii Revised Statutes

§ 386-88 (2015) and Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP)

Rule 4(a)(1). The record does not indicate that Stiner received

an extension of time to appeal under HRAP Rule 4(a)(4), that the

deadline was otherwise tolled under HRAP Rule 4(a)(3), or that

any other exception applies which may excuse the untimely appeal.

Compliance with the requirement of timely filing a notice of NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

appeal is jurisdictional. Ditto v. McCurdy, 103 Hawai i 153,

157, 80 P.3d 974, 978 (2003).

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is

dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, June 27, 2024.

/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

Ditto v. McCurdy
80 P.3d 974 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Stiner v. Bank of America, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stiner-v-bank-of-america-hawapp-2024.