Middleton v. State

Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · February 27, 2025 · No. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

Summary

This Intermediate Court of Appeals order addresses a self-represented appellant's motion for relief from default after failing to file an opening brief within the allotted time. Despite receiving ten prior extensions totaling over 500 days, the appellant did not file the brief or provide new justification beyond chronic medical conditions. Consequently, the court denied the motion and dismissed the appeal pursuant to Hawai'i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 30.

Court
Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
Writing for the Court
Katherine G. Leonard; Keith K. Hiraoka; Karen T. Nakasone
Jurisdiction
Hawaii
Decision date
February 27, 2025
Docket number
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
Procedural posture
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit (civil)
Precedential value
published
Parties
William Middleton v. State of Hawaii, Department of Human Services
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

appellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

appellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the appellate court may deny further extensions and dismiss the appeal for failure to file the opening brief under HRAP Rule 30

Holdings

  1. The motion for relief from default is denied and the appeal is dismissed because no further extensions are permitted and the appellant failed to file the opening brief.

Key quotations

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is denied and the appeal is dismissed. See HRAP Rule 30.

Factual background

Middleton failed to file the required opening brief despite multiple extensions, citing medical and family responsibilities, and did not indicate when the brief would be filed.

Procedural history

The appellate court denied Middleton's motions for extensions of time to file the opening brief, denied his motion for reconsideration, and after a default notice, denied his motion for relief from default, dismissing the appeal under HRAP Rule 30.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…