Case Title: Century 21 Liberty Homes v. Reddish

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2005-09-01T00:00:00Z

Document:
*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION **

No. 25887

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

 

CENTURY 21 LIBERTY HOMES, oy
Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant “Appellee, &

1-38 $00d

LINDA A. REDDISH,
Defendant /Counterclaimant-Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST cael

(CIV. No. 1RCO1~8542)

aqatd

eek Had

(By: Moony Cade, Levinson, Nakayama, Reobee and Dufty 39.)

Defendant /counterclainant-appellant Linda Reddish
appeals pro se from the District Court of the First Circuit's
Novenber 19, 2002 final order’ (1) decreeing that sunnary
possession was obtained by plaintitt/counterciain defendant
appellee Century 21 Liberty Hones; and (2) dismissing Reddish's
counterciain,

Upon carefully reviewing the record, we hold that this
court does not have jurisdiction to hear the instant appeal
because Reddiah's original March 15, 2002 notice of appeal was
already docketed in this court and dismissed by sunnary
deposition order for lack of jurisdiction. See Century 2
Liberty Hones v. Reddish, No, 25037 (Oct. 29, 2002) (order

dismissing as premature the March 15, 2002 appeal because the

the Honorable David L. Fong presided over this matt

 
*** NOTFOR PUBLICATION ***
February 14, 2002 judgment from which appeal was taken did not
conclusively determine all claims in the case). Reddish’s second
notice of appeal, filed on June 6, 2003, was untimely because it

was filed more than 30 days after the Novenber 19, 2002 entry of

 

the final order that did terminate all claims. See Hawai'i Rul

of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 4(a) (1) (“When a civil app

2

 

is permitted by law, the notice of appeal shall be filed within
30 days after entry of the judgment or appealable order."). The
failure to file a timely notice of appeal in a civil matter is a
jurisdictional defect that cen neither be waived by the parties
nor disregarded by the appellate court in the exercise of
judicial discretion. Bacon vs Karlin, 68 Haw. 648, 650, 727 P.2d
1127, 1128; HRAP Rule 26(b) (* [No court or judge or justice is
authorized to change the jurisdictional requirenent [of the 30-
day appeal pericd) contained in Rule 4 of [the HRAP]."). Thus,
we lack jurisdiction over this eppeal. Therefore,
17 IS HEREBY ORDERED that the instant appeal is
disnissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, September 1, 2005.
Linda Reddish, yr
defendant /counterclaimant- y :
appellant, pro se Shc Eatso

kevin S28. Chee Races Erdle ja.r7e

(of Chee & Markham),
for plaintiff/counterclaim

defendant-appellee uv
Century 21 Liberty Homes © Dato