AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF HAWAII FOUNDATION
P.O. Box 3410 Honolulu, Hawaii 96801 Telephone: (808) 522-5900

EDMUNDS MAKI VERGA & THORN Attorneys at Law, A Law Corporation

JOHN S. EDMUNDS RONALD J. VERGA 841 Bishop Street, Suite 2104 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Telephone: (808) 524-2000

734 2638

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

WILLIAM W. REMMERS, JR., in his own )

right, and as representative of all similarly )

situated citizens and residents of the State )

of Hawaii,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

vs.

)

)

DWAYNE D. YOSHINA, Chief Election )

Officer of the Office of Elections, State of )

Hawaii; GENEVIEVE G. WONG, City

)

Clerk, City and County of Honolulu; TED I. )

SAKAI, Director of Department of Public )

Safety, State of Hawaii; EDWIN

)

SHIMODA, Department of Public Safety )

Institutions Division Administrator;

)

CLAYTON FRANK, Warden of the Oahu )

Community Correctional Center; SERNA )

(first name unknown), Sergeant, Oahu )

Community Correctional Facility; JOHN )

MANUMALEUNA, Chief of Security, Oahu )

Community Correctional Center; FRANCIS )

X. SEQUIERA, Acting Warden, Oahu

)

CIVIL NO.
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL; SUMMONS

C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

Community Correctional Center; JOHN )

DOES 1-10, in their individual and official )

capacities,

)

)

Defendants.

)

)

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff WILLIAM REMMERS, JR., in his own right and as representative

of all similarly situated citizens and residents of the State of Hawaii, brings this civil

rights complaint by and through his undersigned counsel and alleges as follows:

Preliminary Statement

1. This is a civil rights class action for damages and declaratory and

injunctive relief against defendants above-named who, in their individual and/or

representative capacities, interfered and continue to interfere with plaintiffs’ right to vote

in general elections. This action is brought pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment to

the United States Constitution and 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) §§ 1983 and 1988.

2. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331,

1343(3) and (4), 2201, and 2202.

3. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), because

Defendants above-named reside in this district and in the State of Hawaii.

4. The various acts and/or omissions alleged herein were engaged in

and carried out by the individual defendants while defendants were employed by the

State of Hawaii, the City and County of Honolulu, the Office of Elections, and/or the

Department of Public Safety. All of the various acts and/or omissions alleged herein

were engaged in and carried out by individual defendants under color of state law.

2 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

5. The various acts and omissions alleged herein were engaged in and carried out by officials of the State of Hawaii and/or the City and County of Honolulu acting by and through their employees and officials, pursuant to government policy statement, ordinance, regulation, or decision officially promulgated by that governmental units’ officers, and/or pursuant to government custom, practice and policy which was so permanent and well-settled that it constituted practice or policy which had the force of law.
Parties 6. Plaintiff WILLIAM REMMERS, JR. (Remmers) is at least 18 years of age, a United States citizen, registered voter and resident of the City and County of Honolulu, State of Hawaii. At the time of the federal and state election held on November 7, 2000, Remmers was registered to vote and was a pretrial detainee being held at Oahu Community Correctional Center (OCCC). 7. Defendant DWAYNE D. YOSHINA (Yoshina) is the appointed Chief Election Officer of the Office of Elections for the State of Hawaii. At all times relevant hereto, Yoshina was acting in his capacity as Chief Election Officer and under color of state law. Yoshina is sued in his individual and official capacities. Yoshina is charged with carrying out the duties and responsibilities entrusted to the Office of Elections. Under HRS § 11-2, Yoshina is charged with the following duties: (1) supervise all state elections; (2) maximize the registration of eligible electors throughout the State; (3) maintain data concerning registered voters, elections, apportionment, and distracting, (4) provide public education with respect to voter materials; and (5) adopt rules governing elections.
3 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

8. Defendant GENEVIEVE G. WONG (Wong) is the appointed City Clerk for the City and County of Honolulu. At all times relevant hereto, Wong was acting in her capacity as City Clerk and under color of state law. Wong is sued in her individual and official capacities. Wong is responsible for registering all voters and conducting all elections in the City and County of Honolulu. Pursuant to HRS Chapter 15 and Hawaii Administrative Rules Chapter 53, Wong is charged with issuing absentee ballots to registered voters who request to vote absentee.
9. Defendant TED I. SAKAI (Sakai) is the appointed Director of the Department of Public Safety for the State of Hawaii. At all times relevant hereto, Sakai was acting in his capacity as Director of Public Safety and under color of state law. Sakai is sued in his individual and official capacities. Sakai is charged with carrying out the duties and responsibilities entrusted to the Department of Public Safety. Pursuant to HRS Chapter 353C and § 26-14.6, Sakai is responsible for ensuring that correctional facilities, including OCCC, and correctional services meet the present and future needs of persons committed to the Department of Public Safety and for the administration and maintenance of all public or private correctional facilities and services in the State of Hawaii.
10. Defendant EDWIN SHIMODA (Shimoda) is an individual employed as the Institutions Division Administrator for the Department of Public Safety. At all times relevant hereto, Shimoda was acting in his capacity and under color of state law. Shimoda is sued in his individual and official capacities.
11. Defendant CLAYTON FRANK (Frank) is an individual currently employed as the Warden of OCCC. At all times relevant hereto, Frank was acting in
4 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

his capacity as Warden and under color of state law. Frank is sued in his individual and official capacities. Frank is an employee of the Department of Public Safety and is charged with supervising the operations of OCCC.
12. Defendant SERNA (first name unknown) (Serna) is an individual who is employed by the Department of Public Safety as a Sergeant at OCCC. At all times relevant hereto, Serna was acting in that capacity and under color of state law. Serna is sued in his individual and official capacities.
13. Defendant JOHN MANUMALEUNA (Manumaleuna) is an individual who is employed by the Department of Public Safety as Chief of Security at OCCC. At all times relevant hereto, Manumaleuna was acting in that capacity and under color of state law. Manumaleuna is sued in his individual and official capacities.
14. Defendant FRANCIS X. SEQUIERA (Sequiera) is an individual who at all times relevant hereto was an employee of the Department of Public Safety assigned to work at OCCC. At all times relevant hereto, Sequiera was the Acting Warden of OCCC and acting in his official capacity and under color of state law. Sequiera is sued in his individual and official capacities.
15. The names JOHN DOES 1-10 (John Doe defendants) represent all other defendants, who are unknown to plaintiffs. John Doe defendants were employees of the City and County of Honolulu and/or the State of Hawaii and/or acted under color of state law. John Doe defendants participated in the unconstitutional acts or omissions of defendants. Plaintiffs will move the court to amend this complaint to name such defendants once their identities are ascertained.
5 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

Class Action Allegations 16. Plaintiff Remmers brings this action on his own behalf and on behalf of a class of all persons similarly situated pursuant to Rules 23(a), (b)(2) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 17. The class which Plaintiff Remmers seeks to represent consists of all pretrial detainees and all other prisoners incarcerated in Hawaii, who are otherwise eligible to vote, are registered voters or take steps to register as voters, seek to vote in a general election, and are denied an equal opportunity to vote and have their votes counted in that election, by actions, policies and practices of the above-named defendants, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and/or 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (hereinafter the “Class”). The Class consists of (1) former pretrial detainees and eligible prisoners whose right to vote was denied and whose claims are not barred by the applicable statute of limitations, (2) current pretrial detainees and eligible prisoners who plan to vote in future elections, and (3) future pretrial detainees and eligible prisoners who plan to vote in future elections. 18. The members of the Class are so numerous as to make it impracticable to bring them all before the Court. The exact number of individuals in the Class is not known by plaintiffs, but is known by defendants. 19. There are questions of law and fact common to the Class. The common questions include whether the defendants’ failure to develop and implement a plan to ensure Class members their right to vote while they are under the custody and supervision of the Department of Public Safety violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
6 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

20. The claims of Plaintiff Remmers are typical of the claims of the Class. Remmers was otherwise eligible to vote in the November 7, 2000 general election, was registered to vote in that election, sought to vote in that election, and was denied an equal opportunity to vote and have his vote counted in that election by actions, policies and practices of the defendants.
21. Plaintiff Remmers will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the Class. Remmers has no interests antagonistic to the Class. He seeks declaratory and injunctive relief on behalf of the entire class and such relief will benefit all members of the Class. Remmers further seeks an award of damages, on his own behalf and on behalf of all eligible class members, against individual defendants for past deprivation of civil rights.
22. Remmers is represented by counsel who are competent and experienced in civil rights and class action litigation.
23. Class certification pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a), (b)(2), and (b)(3) is warranted because (1) the defendants have acted or failed to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief with respect to the Class as a whole, and (2) questions of law and/or fact common to members of the Class predominate over questions affecting only individual members. Proceeding by class action in this case is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy.
Facts 24. Hawaii state law provides that any person registered and otherwise eligible to vote may cast an absentee ballot. HRS § 15-2.
7 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

25. Prior to the November 2000 election, Plaintiff Remmers was arrested and detained at OCCC. He was held as a pretrial detainee in Module Three.
26. Prior to the November 2000 election, Defendant Serna and/or other employees of the Department of Public Safety assigned to OCCC announced that a sign-up sheet would be posted in Module Three. Plaintiff Remmers and other inmates, who were eligible to vote, were instructed that if they wanted to vote in the upcoming election by absentee ballot they were to list their names, prisoner identification number and prisoner status on the sign-up sheet. Defendant Serna and/or other Department of Public Safety employees told Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates that simply filling out the information on the sign-up sheet would secure their right and ability to vote in the upcoming election.
27 The sign-up sheet was posted and Plaintiff Remmers and at least nine other inmates of Module Three listed their names and other identifying information on the sign-up sheet.
28. Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates of Module Three were not told that an Application for Absentee Voter Ballot was available from the Office of the City Clerk. Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates of Module Three did not receive an Application for Absentee Voter Ballot. Instead, they were told by Serna and/or other employees of the Department of Public Safety to simply list their names on the sign-up sheet to ensure their ability to vote.
29. Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates of Module Three did not receive an Absentee Voter Ballot. Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates of Module Three were not able to vote at the polls as they were not allowed to leave the premises
8 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

of OCCC. Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates of Module Three were denied their right to vote.
30. As a result of defendants Yoshina, Wong, Sakai, Shimoda, Manumaleuna, Serna and Sequiera’s failure to develop and implement a plan to ensure that Plaintiff Remmers and other Class members could exercise their right to vote, Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates of Module Three were deprived of their right to vote in the November 2000 election.
31. On or about November 7, 2000, Plaintiff Remmers filed an Inmate Complaint/Grievance form with the Department of Public Safety, alleging that he had been deprived of his right to vote.
32. On or about November 11, 2000, Defendant Manumaleuna responded that Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates were denied the right to vote by absentee ballot because there were no certified officials present at OCCC to monitor the absentee ballots.
33. On or about December 8, 2000, Plaintiff Remmers filed an appeal of his Inmate Complaint/Grievance with the Department of Public Safety, again alleging that the actions, omissions, policies and/or procedures of the Department of Public Safety deprived him of his right to vote.
34. On or about December 21, 2000, Defendant Sequiera responded that Plaintiff Remmers and the other inmates were given an opportunity to register to vote and that all voter registration applications were forwarded to City and County of Honolulu voting officials. Defendant Sequiera maintained that OCCC was not responsible for distributing absentee ballots to inmates.
9 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

35. On or about December 26, 2000, Plaintiff Remmers filed a further appeal with the Department of Public Safety, again asserting that the actions, omissions, policies and/or procedures of the Department of Public Safety deprived him of his right to vote.
36. On or about February 26, 2001, Defendant Shimoda responded that the Department of Public Safety did not have a deputized volunteer at OCCC authorized to accept and collect inmate absentee ballots. According to Shimoda, Defendant Wong and/or the Office of the City Clerk informed OCCC that without a deputized volunteer all absentee ballots from OCCC would be void. Defendant Shimoda suggested that Plaintiff Remmers address his concerns to Defendant Wong.
37. As a direct result of the Department of Public Safety’s policy statement, ordinance, regulation, official decision, custom, practice and/or policy, as developed and/or implemented by Defendants Sakai, Shimoda, Manumaleuna, Serna, and Sequiera, Plaintiff Remmers and members of the Class were deprived of their constitutional right to vote, in violation of their civil rights as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, rendering defendants liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
38. As a direct result of the Office of the City Clerk’s policy statement, ordinance, regulation, official decision, custom, practice and/or policy, as developed and/or implemented by Defendant Wong, Plaintiff Remmers and members of the Class were deprived of their constitutional right to vote, in violation of their civil rights as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, rendering defendants liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\O1R0GANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

39. As a direct result of the Office of Elections’ policy statement, ordinance, regulation, official decision, custom, practice and/or policy, as developed and/or implemented by Defendant Yoshina, Plaintiff Remmers and members of the Class were deprived of their constitutional right to vote, in violation of their civil rights as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, rendering defendants liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
40. Acting under color of state law, defendants Yoshina, Wong, Sakai, Sequiera, and Frank knowingly deprived and/or continue to deprive Plaintiff Remmers and other members of the Class of their constitutional right to vote by failing to adopt, incorporate and enforce such rules, regulations, policies and procedures as would ensure Class members’ right and ability to vote while Class members are under the custody and supervision of the Department of Public Safety.
41. Unless enjoined by this Court, defendants acts and/or omission will deprive current and future Class members of their right to vote.
42. By reason of the foregoing unlawful and deliberate acts and/or omissions of defendants, Plaintiff Remmers and other Class members have been damaged in an amount to be determined.
42. Because of the continuing nature of the foregoing unlawful and deliberate acts and/or omissions of defendants, Plaintiff Remmers and Plaintiff Class have no adequate and sufficient remedy at law with which to address the wrongs alleged herein and will continue to suffer the deprivation of their constitutional rights from the conduct of the defendants unless Plaintiff Remmers and Plaintiff Class are granted the equitable relief prayed for herein.
C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\O1R1GANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Remmers and Plaintiff Class pray for relief as follows:
1. That this Court determine and enter judgment declaring that the acts and/or omissions of the defendants, as set forth above, violate rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States;
2. That upon hearing, the Court issue a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting the defendants from denying Plaintiff class their right to vote and ordering defendants to develop and implement a plan to ensure Plaintiff Class their right to vote while Plaintiff Class are under the custody and supervision of the Department of Public Safety;
3. That the Court award damages to Plaintiff Remmers and any other eligible Class members;
4. That defendants be required to pay the legal costs and expenses herein, including reasonable provision for attorney’s fees;
5. That the Court grant such further and additional relief as is appropriate herein.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, ____________________________________.
_____________________________________ JOHN S. EDMUNDS RONALD J. VERGA Attorneys for Plaintiff
C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\O1R2GANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

WILLIAM W. REMMERS, JR., in his own )

right, and as representative of all similarly )

situated citizens and residents of the State )

of Hawaii,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

vs.

)

)

DWAYNE D. YOSHINA, Chief Election )

Officer of the Office of Elections, State of )

Hawaii; GENEVIEVE G. WONG, City

)

Clerk, City and County of Honolulu; TED I. )

SAKAI, Director of Department of Public )

Safety, State of Hawaii; EDWIN

)

SHIMODA, Department of Public Safety )

Institutions Division Administrator;

)

CLAYTON FRANK, Warden of the Oahu )

Community Correctional Center; SERNA )

(first name unknown), Sergeant, Oahu )

Community Correctional Facility; JOHN )

MANUMALEUNA, Chief of Security, Oahu )

Community Correctional Center; FRANCIS )

X. SEQUIERA, Acting Warden, Oahu

)

Community Correctional Center; JOHN )

DOES 1-10, in their individual and official )

capacities,

)

)

Defendants.

)

)

CIVIL NO. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff demands trial by jury on all issues so triable herein.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, ____________________________________.

____________________________________ JOHN S. EDMUNDS RONALD J. VERGA Attorneys for Plaintiff
C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

WILLIAM W. REMMERS, JR., in his own )

right, and as representative of all similarly )

situated citizens and residents of the State )

of Hawaii,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

vs.

)

)

DWAYNE D. YOSHINA, Chief Election )

Officer of the Office of Elections, State of )

Hawaii; GENEVIEVE G. WONG, City

)

Clerk, City and County of Honolulu; TED I. )

SAKAI, Director of Department of Public )

Safety, State of Hawaii; EDWIN

)

SHIMODA, Department of Public Safety )

Institutions Division Administrator;

)

CLAYTON FRANK, Warden of the Oahu )

Community Correctional Center; SERNA )

(first name unknown), Sergeant, Oahu )

Community Correctional Facility; JOHN )

MANUMALEUNA, Chief of Security, Oahu )

Community Correctional Center; FRANCIS )

X. SEQUIERA, Acting Warden, Oahu

)

Community Correctional Center; JOHN )

DOES 1-10, in their individual and official )

capacities,

)

)

Defendants.

)

)

CIVIL NO. SUMMONS

SUMMONS TO: THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS

YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to file with the Clerk of this Court and serve upon Plaintiff’s attorneys:

C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

JOHN S. EDMUNDS, ESQ. RONALD J. VERGA, ESQ. Edmunds Maki Verga & Thorn 841 Bishop Street, Suite 2104 Honolulu, HI 96813 Tel: (808) 524-2000
an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within ______ days
after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do
so, judgement by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the
complaint.

_________________________________ CLERK

__________________________ DATE

_________________________________ BY DEPUTY CLERK

3 C:\ DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ALL USERS\DOCUMENTS\ ORGANIZED BRIEF BANK\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, HI VOTING
CASE\REMMERS V. YOSHINA, COMPLAINT.DOC

 
 Case: 1:02-cv-451 As of: 05/07/2020 12:40 PM HST 1 of 7
U.S. District Court District of Hawaii (Hawaii) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:02−cv−00451−DAE−KSC

TERMED

Remmers v. Yoshina, et al Assigned to: JUDGE DAVID ALAN EZRA Referred to: JUDGE KEVIN S.C. CHANG Demand: $0 Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff
William W. Remmers, Jr. in his own right, and as representative of all similarly situated citizens and residents of the State of Hawaii

Date Filed: 07/22/2002 Date Terminated: 12/13/2004 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 441 Civil Rights: Voting Jurisdiction: Federal Question
represented by John S. Edmunds John S. Edmunds, Attorney At Law, LLLC Davies Pacific Center 841 Bishop St Ste 1715 Honolulu, HI 96813 524−2000 Email: john@jedmundslaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ronald J. Verga Edmunds Verga & Omonaka LLC Davies Pacific Center 841 Bishop St Ste 410 Honolulu, HI 96813 524−2000 Email: rverga@ev−law.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Chief Election Officer of the Office of Elections, State of Hawaii
Defendant Genevieve G. Wong in her individual capacity and in her official capacity as City Clerk, City and County of Honolulu

represented by Aaron H. Schulaner Department of the Attorney General Education Division 235 S Beretania St Rm 304 Honolulu, HI 96813 586−1255 Email: aaron.h.schulaner@hawaii.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Russell A. Suzuki Office of the Attorney General−Hawaii 425 Queen St Honolulu, HI 96813 586−1500 Email: russell.a.suzuki@hawaii.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Denise Balanay Office of Corporation Counsel−Honolulu 530 S King St Ste 110 Honolulu, HI 96813 523−4859 (main) LEAD ATTORNEY

Case: 1:02-cv-451 As of: 05/07/2020 12:40 PM HST 2 of 7

Defendant Ted I. Sakai in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Director of Department of Public Safety, State of Hawaii
Defendant Edwin Shimoda in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Department of Public Safety Institutions Division Administrator
Defendant Clayton Frank in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Warden of the Oahu Community Correctional Center
Defendant Serna in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Sergeant, Oahu Community Correctional Facility

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Laura A. Kuioka Fukunaga Matayoshi Ching & Kon−Herrera, LLP 841 Bishop St Ste 1200 Honolulu, Hi 96813 792−4818 Fax: 531−7585 Email: lak@fmhc−law.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Cindy S. Inouye Office of the Attorney General−Hawaii 425 Queen St Honolulu, HI 96813 586−1500 TERMINATED: 11/08/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John M. Cregor , Jr. 586−1494 Fax: 586−1369 Email: John.M.Cregor@hawaii.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Cindy S. Inouye (See above for address) TERMINATED: 11/08/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John M. Cregor , Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Cindy S. Inouye (See above for address) TERMINATED: 11/08/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John M. Cregor , Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Cindy S. Inouye (See above for address) TERMINATED: 11/08/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John M. Cregor , Jr.

Case: 1:02-cv-451 As of: 05/07/2020 12:40 PM HST 3 of 7

Defendant John Manumaleuna in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Chief of Security, Oahu Community Correctional Center
Defendant Francis X. Sequiera in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Acting Warden, Oahu Community Correctional Center
Defendant John Does 1−10

(See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Cindy S. Inouye (See above for address) TERMINATED: 11/08/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John M. Cregor , Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Cindy S. Inouye (See above for address) TERMINATED: 11/08/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John M. Cregor , Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 07/22/2002 07/22/2002 07/22/2002 07/26/2002 07/26/2002 07/26/2002 07/26/2002 08/02/2002 08/02/2002 08/15/2002

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT; demand for jury trial; summons (Summons issued) (afc) (Entered: 07/22/2002)
2 ORDER by Judge David A. Ezra rule 16 conference set for 9:00 10/21/02 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 07/22/2002)
FILING FEE PAID in the amount of $150.00, receipt #210160 (afc) (Entered: 07/22/2002)
3 RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Ted I. Sakai on 7/25/02 through agent/secretary Henry Leong (fe) (Entered: 07/26/2002)
4 RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Edwin Shimoda on 7/25/02 (fe) (Entered: 07/26/2002)
5 RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Francis X. Sequiera on 7/25/02 (fe) (Entered: 07/26/2002)
6 RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Clayton Frank on 7/25/02 through secretary Nonah Apao, authorized agent (fe) (Entered: 07/26/2002)
7 RETURN OF SERVICE of complaint and summons executed upon defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina on 7/30/02 (afc) (Entered: 08/05/2002)
8 RETURN OF SERVICE of complaint and summons executed upon defendant Genevieve G. Wong on 7/29/02 (afc) (Entered: 08/05/2002)
9 NOTICE OF MOTION and motion by defendants Ted I. Sakai, Edwin Shimoda, Clayton Frank, "Unknown" Serna, John Manumaleuna, and Francis X. Sequiera to dismiss ; memorandum of law in support of motion; exhibit a; certificate of service − set for 11:15 10/28/02 before Judge David A. Ezra (fe) (Entered: 08/15/2002)

Case: 1:02-cv-451 As of: 05/07/2020 12:40 PM HST 4 of 7

08/19/2002 08/26/2002 09/12/2002 09/12/2002 10/01/2002 10/01/2002 10/01/2002 10/10/2002 10/11/2002 10/14/2002 10/15/2002 10/15/2002 10/17/2002 10/21/2002 10/25/2002
10/28/2002

10 NOTICE OF MOTION and motion by defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina to dismiss ; memorandum in support; certificate of service − set for 11:15 10/28/02 before Judge David A. Ezra (fe) (Entered: 08/20/2002)
11 ANSWER by defendant Genevieve G. Wong to complaint [1−1]; certificate of service (fe) (Entered: 08/27/2002)
12 RETURN OF SERVICE of complaint and summons executed upon defendant John Manumaleuna on 9/10/02 (afc) (Entered: 09/12/2002)
13 RETURN OF SERVICE of complaint and summons executed upon defendant Margrette Serna on 9/10/02 (note: deft named on the complaint as "first name unknown" Serna) (afc) (Entered: 09/12/2002)
14 Substantive JOINDER by defendant Genevieve G. Wong in defendants Ted I. Sakai, Edwin T. Shimoda, et al. MOTION to dismiss filed 08−15−02; certificate of service [9−1] (afc) Modified on 10/02/2002 (Entered: 10/02/2002)
15 Substantive JOINDER by defendant Genevieve G. Wong in defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina's motion to dismiss [10−1]; memorandum in support of motion; certificate of service (afc) (Entered: 10/02/2002)
16 REPORT OF PARTIES PLANNING MEETING; certificate of service − by plaintiff (afc) (Entered: 10/02/2002)
17 MEMORANDUM by plaintiff in opposition to defendants' motions to dismiss; certificate of service [10−1] [9−1] (afc) (Entered: 10/10/2002)
18 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE STATEMENT; certificate of service − by defendant Genevieve G. Wong (afc) (Entered: 10/15/2002)
19 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE STATEMENT; certificate of service − by defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina (afc) (Entered: 10/15/2002)
20 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE STATEMENT; certificate of service − by defendant Ted I. Sakai, defendant Edwin Shimoda, defendant Clayton Frank, defendant Sgt.Serna, defendant John Manumaleuna (afc) (Entered: 10/16/2002)
21 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE STATEMENT; certificate of service − by plaintiff (afc) (Entered: 10/16/2002)
22 REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in support of defendants' motion to dismiss − by defendant Ted I. Sakai, defendant Edwin Shimoda, defendant Clayton Frank, defendant Francis X. Sequiera, defendant Sgt. Serna, and defendant John Manumaleuna to response to motion to dismiss [9−1] (afc) (Entered: 10/17/2002)
23 EP: Rule 16 Scheduling Conference continued to 11/21/2002 09:00:00 AM KSC. Motion to Dismiss is set to be heard on 10−28−02 before DAE. (Ct Rptr: In Chambers − No Record) JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 10/25/2002)
24 EO: Defendants Ted I. Sakai, Edwin T. Shimoda, Clayton Frank, Francis X. Sequeira, Sgt. Serna and John Manumaleuna's Motion to Dismiss. Defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina's Motion to Dismiss. Defendant Genevieve G. Wong's Substantive Joinder in Defendants Ted Sakai, Edwin T. Shimoda, Clayton Frank, Francis X. Sequeira, Sgt. Serna and John Manumaleuna's Motion to Dismiss. Defendant Genevieve G. Wong's Substantive Joinder in Defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina's Motion to Dismiss Defendants Ted I. Sakai, Edwin T. Shimoda, Clayton Frank, Francis X. Sequeira, Sgt. Serna and John Manumaleuna's Motion to Dismiss−TO BE DECIDED ON THE PAPERS [9−1]. Defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina's Motion to Dismiss−TO BE DECIDED ON THE PAPERS [10−1]. Defendant Genevieve G. Wong's Substantive Joinder in Defendants Ted Sakai, Edwin T. Shimoda, Clayton Frank, Francis X. Sequeira, Sgt. Serna and John Manumaleuna's Motion to Dismiss−TO BE DECIDED ON THE PAPERS [14−1]. Defendant Genevieve G. Wong's Substantive Joinder in Defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina's Motion to Dismiss−TO BE DECIDED ON THE PAPERS [15−1]. All counsel notified by phone. cc: All Counsel () JUDGE Judge David A. Ezra (afc) (Entered: 10/28/2002)
25 ORDER granting defendants Ted I. Sakai's, Edwin T. Shimoda's, Clayton Frank's, Francis X. Sequiera's, Sgt. Serna's, and John Manumaleuna's Motion to Dismiss;

Case: 1:02-cv-451 As of: 05/07/2020 12:40 PM HST 5 of 7

11/21/2002
11/25/2002 12/11/2002 12/23/2002 01/07/2003 01/21/2003 01/27/2003 02/10/2003 02/21/2003 02/28/2003

ORDER granting in part and denying in part defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina's motion to dismiss by Judge David A. Ezra [10−1][9−1] − [court grants Public Safety defendants motion to dismiss and therefore dismisses plaintiff's equitable claims. However, court denies defendant Yoshina's motion to dismiss plaintiff's claims for money damages] (cc: all counsel and/or parties of record) (afc) (Entered: 10/28/2002)
26 EP: Rule 16 Scheduling Conference − 1. Jury trial on October 21, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. before DAE 2. Final Pretrial Conference on September 9, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. before KSC 3. Final Pretrial Conference before District Judge N/A 4. Final Pretrial Statement by September 2, 2003 5. File motions to Join/Add Parties/Amend Pleadings by March 21, 2003 6. File other Non−Dispositive Motions by July 23, 2003 7. File Dispositive Motions by May 21, 2003 8a. File Motions in Limine by September 30, 2003 8b. File opposition memo to a Motion in Limine by October 7, 2003 11a. Plaintiff's Expert Witness Disclosures by April 21, 2003 11b. Defendant's Expert Witness Disclosures by May 21, 2003 12. Discovery deadline August 22, 2003 13. Settlement Conference set for January 10, 2003 at 10:00 a.m. before KSC 14. Settlement Conference statements by January 3, 2003 20. Submit Voir Dire Questions, Special Verdict Form, Concise Statement of Case and Jury Instructions by October 7, 2003 21. File Final witness list by September 30, 2003 24. Exchange Exhibit and Demonstrative aids by September 23, 2003 25. Stipulations re: Authenticity/Admissibility of Proposed Exhibits by September 30, 2003 26. File objections to the Exhibits by October 7, 2003 28a. File Deposition Excerpt Designations by September 30, 2003 28b. File Deposition Counter Designations and Objections by October 7, 2003 29. File Trial Brief by October 7, 2003 30. File Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law by N/A [rule 16 scheduling conference held on 9:00 11/21/02 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang ; Jury Trial set for 9:00 10/21/03 before Judge David A. Ezra ; final pretrial conference set for 9:00 9/9/03 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang ; Discovery ddl set for 8/22/03; Motion filing ddl set for 5/21/03; settlement conference set for 1/10/03 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang] (Ct Rptr: No Record) JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 11/27/2002)
27 RULE 16 SCHEDULING ORDER Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (cc: all counsel) (afc) (Entered: 11/27/2002)
28 ANSWER by defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina to complaint; certificate of service [1−1] (afc) (Entered: 12/12/2002)
29 ANSWER by defendant TED I. SAKAI, defendant EDWIN SHIMODA, defendant CLAYTON FRANK, defendant FRANCIS X. SEQUEIRA, defendant SGT. SERNA, and defendant JOHN MANUMALEUNA to complaint; certificate of service [1−1] (afc) (Entered: 12/24/2002)
30 EO: Continued : [Settlement Conference] from 01/10/2003 10:00:00 AM to 01/21/2003 10:30:00 AM before KSC. Notified Aaron Shulander and John Edmunds thru his secretary. () JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 01/13/2003)
31 EP: Settlement Conference held. Case settled. Filing of Dismissal is set for 02/28/2003 09:00:00 AM before KSC. All dates vacated. Itemized billing by Verga submitted by 1−28−03. Comments to Verga's billing by defendants submitted by 2−4−03. Court will issue a minute order regarding the itemized billing. (Courtroom 5) JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 01/22/2003)
32 DECLARATION of Ronald J. Verga; exhibit A; and certificate of service − by plaintiff [31−3] (afc) (Entered: 01/28/2003)
33 ORDER regarding attorney fees and costs by Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang [31−3] (cc: all counsel) (afc) (Entered: 02/11/2003)
34 EO: Status Conference regarding the Settlement set for 9:00 2/28/03 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang ; This case has been settled but Plaintiffs Atty., Ronald J. Verga, wanted to turn this date in a Status Conference regarding the Settlement instead of the Order for Dismissal being issued by this Court as to this case. Plaintiffs Counsel Ronald J. Verga to notify all Counsel of this Status Conference Date. () JUDGE Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 02/24/2003)
35 EP: Status Conference regarding the Settlement − held. Further conference continued to 9:00 3/21/03 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (Ct Rptr: None) JUDGE Mag Judge

Case: 1:02-cv-451 As of: 05/07/2020 12:40 PM HST 6 of 7

03/19/2003 03/25/2003
04/25/2003 09/02/2003 05/21/2004 05/27/2004
06/09/2004 08/02/2004 08/06/2004 08/16/2004 08/16/2004
10/08/2004 10/20/2004
10/22/2004

Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 03/03/2003)
36 EO: Status Conference Re: Settlement set for 3/21/2003 at 9:00 AM continued to 03/25/2003 at 9:00 AM before KSC cc: all counsel by fax () JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 03/21/2003)
37 EP : Status Conference re: settlement. Discussion held regarding settlement. Mr. Verga and Mr. Cregor are to meet to find a common ground to close out this case per the settlement agreement. Further status conference re: settlement has been set for 9:00 4/25/03 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang ( Ct Rptr : None) JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (gab) (Entered: 03/27/2003)
38 EP: Further Status Conference Re: Settlement. Discussion held. Parties working on language of settlement. Defendant to increase the pot by $400. Parties to file a motion regarding fairness with Judge Ezra. () JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 04/29/2003)
39 FINAL PRETRIAL STATEMENT; certificate of service − by defendant Genevieve G. Wong (afc) (Entered: 09/02/2003)
40 EO: Status conference set for 9:00 5/27/04 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang ; cc: all counsel via fax () JUDGE Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 05/24/2004)
41 EP : Status Conference. Case re−opened because class action matter for settlement came up. Mr. Verga sent a revised Settlement Agreement to Mr. Cregor. Counsel need two weeks to get documents in place and then will submit them to Judge Chang. Fairness Hearing to be set up thereafter. Further Status Conference set 6/9/04 at 9:00am before Judge Chang. ; settlement/status conference set for 9:00 6/9/04 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang ( Ct Rptr : C5, no record) JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (sm) (Entered: 05/27/2004)
42 EP: Further Status Conference. Fairness Hearing set for 10/19/04 at 9:30am before Judge Chang. (Ct Rptr: C5 − No Record) JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 06/10/2004)
43 EO: By agreement of counsel, the Fairness Hearing currently set for 10/19/2004 at 9:30 AM has been continued to 11/16/2004 at 9:30 AM before Judge Chang. Ron Verga to notify all parties. () JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 08/02/2004)
44 AFFIDAVIT OF RONALD J. VERGA; certificate of service [copy of the Summary Notice of Proposed Class Action and Proposed Settlement mailed, postage prepaid, to each person whose name appears on the list of detainees registered for the 2000 elections, etc.] (afc) (Entered: 08/09/2004)
45 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION − filed by plaintiffs − Summary Notice of Proposed Class Action and Proposed Settlement published in Honolulu Star Bulletin 1 time on August 4, 2004 (afc) (Entered: 08/16/2004)
46 NOTICE OF MOTION and motion by plaintiffs for order certifying settlement class, approving class settlement and plan of distribution and for further relief ; memorandum in support of motion; exhibit A; declaration of Ronald J. Verga; certificate of service − set for 9:30 11/16/04 before Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 08/17/2004)
47 JOINDER by defendant City and County of Honolulu in plaintiffs' motion for order certifying settlement class, approving class settlement and plan of distribution and for further relief [46−1]; certificate of service (afc) (Entered: 10/08/2004)
48 JOINDER by defendant Ted I. Sakai, defendant Edwin Shimoda, defendant Clayton Frank, defendant Francis X. Sequiera, defendant Sgt. Serna, defendant John Manumaleuna in plaintiffs' MOTION for order certifying settlement class, approving class settlement and plan of distribution and for further relief [46−1]; certificate of service (afc) (Entered: 10/21/2004)
49 JOINDER by defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina in plaintiffs' motion for order certifying settlement class, approving class settlement and plan of distribution and for further relief [46−1]; certificate of service (afc) (Entered: 10/24/2004)

Case: 1:02-cv-451 As of: 05/07/2020 12:40 PM HST 7 of 7

11/03/2004 11/16/2004
11/22/2004 11/22/2004 12/10/2004 12/13/2004

50 Class Counsel's Report to the Court; and Certificate of service (gab) (Entered: 11/04/2004)
51 EP: 1.Plaintiffs' Motion For Order Certifying Settlement Class, Approving Class Settlement and Plan of Distribution and for Further Relief [46−1]; 2.Defendant City and County of Honolulu's Joinder in Plaintiffs' Motion for Order Certifying Settlement Class, Approving Class Settlement and Plan of Distribution and for Further Relief, Filed on August 16, 2004 [47−1]; 3.Defendants' Ted I. Sakai, Edwin T. Shimoda, Clayton Frank, Francix X. Sequeira, Sgt. Serna and John Manumaleuna Joinder in Plaintiffs' Motion for Order Certifying Settlement Class, Approving Class Settlement and Plan of Distribution and for Further Relief [48−1]; 4. Defendant Dwayne D. Yoshina's Joinder In Plaintiffs' Motion For Order Certifying Settlement Class, Approving Class Settlement and Plan of Distribution and for Further Relief [49−1] − Motion and joinders granted. Mr. Verga to prepare the order. (Ct Rptr: FTR C5; Time: 9:31−9:41:13) JUDGE Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang (afc) (Entered: 11/16/2004)
52 ORDER OF DESIGNATION TO A MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge David A. Ezra − purs to 28 USC 636(b)(1)(b) and 636(b)(3) & LR 72.4, USMJ Kevin S.C. Chang is designated to hear Motion by plaintiffs for order certifying settlement class, approving class settlement and plan of distribution and for further relief [46−1] (cc: all counsel, KSC, CRM Shari) (afc) (Entered: 11/23/2004)
53 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS granting plaintiffs' motion for order certifying settlement class, approving class settlement and plan of distribution and for further relief [46−1] by Mag Judge Kevin S. Chang − filed by plaintiffs (cc: all counsel) (afc) (Entered: 11/23/2004)
54 ORDER adopting magistrate's findings and recommendation by Judge David A. Ezra [53−1] (cc: all counsel) (afc) (Entered: 12/13/2004)
55 JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE − by Walter A.Y.H. Chinn, Clerk/A.F. Chang, Deputy Clerk − Findings and Recommendations having been entered by U.S. Magistrate Judge Kevin S.C. Chang on November 22, 2004, and said Findings and Recommendations having been adopted by Chief U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra on December 10, 2004, IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED THAT pursuant to said Findings and Recommendations and pursuant to said Orders adopting the Findings and Recommendations: This matter is certified as a class action for Settlement Purposes; Plaintiff William W. Remmers, Jr. is appointed as Representative of the Class; The law firm of Edmunds & Verga, John S. Edmunds, Esq., and Ronald J. Verga, Esq. are appointed as counsel for the class; Settlement of the Action is approved pursuant to the Class Action Settlement Agreement; The form and method of notice and the schedule of opt out, objection fairness hearing, and other dates and deadlines provided for in the Class Action Settlement Agreement is approved; The five clearly−eligible claimants and "Oahu Claimant 2" as described in Class Counsel's Report to the Court dated November 3, 2004 as Eligible Claimants as that term is defined in the Class Action Settlement Agreement is approved; The Court directs payment to the Eligible Claimants pursuant to the Class Action Settlement Agreement; Payment of $10,000.00 as fees and costs is to be made to Edmunds & Verga; and The Action is DISMISSED. terminating case (cc: all counsel) (afc) (Entered: 12/13/2004)