NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-21-0000536 

(Consolidated with NO. CAAP-21-0000545)

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I

CAAP-21-0000536

STUART B. GLAUBERMAN, by his Managing Agent, KFG PROPERTIES, 

INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v.

CELESTE M. GONSALVES, Defendant-Appellant

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT

KO‘OLAUPOKO DIVISION

(CIVIL NO. 1DRC-21-0002121)

and

CAAP-21-0000545

STUART B. GLAUBERMAN and VICKY RAMIL, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v.

CELESTE M. GONSALVES, Defendant-Appellant

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT

KO‘OLAUPOKO DIVISION

(CIVIL NO. 1DRC-21-0001879)

Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-21-0000536

19-JAN-2024

08:00 AM

Dkt. 101 SO
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

2

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER

(By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Guidry, JJ.)

In these consolidated appeals, self-represented 

Defendant-Appellant Celeste M. Gonsalves (Gonsalves) appeals 

from the September 29, 2021 Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion 

for Summary Judgment Filed on September 7, 2021, in favor of 

self-represented Plaintiff-Appellee Stuart B. Glauberman 

(Glauberman), by his Managing Agent, KFG Properties, Inc. (KFG 

Properties), and the October 4, 2021 Judgment for Possession in 

favor of Glauberman and Plaintiff-Appellee Vicky Ramil (Ramil), 

entered by the District Court of the First Circuit Ko‘olaupoko 

Division (District Court),1 in Civil Nos. 1DRC-21-0002121 and 

1DRC-21-0001879 respectively. 

Glauberman and Ramil rented an accessory dwelling unit 

to Gonsalves, and self-managed the rental unit until December 

2020, when they hired KFG Properties as their property manager. 

On February 21, 2021, Glauberman and Ramil filed a Complaint 

(Assumpsit, Summary Possession/Landlord – Tenant Damages)

against Gonsalves in Civil No. 1DRC-21-0001879, alleging 

Gonsalves caused electrical and plumbing damage to the premises, 

failed to properly dispose of garbage and refused their requests 

1 The Honorable Karin L. Holma presided. 
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

3

for an inspection, and that they had given Gonsalves a 10-day 

non-monetary default notice on February 9, 2021. 

On March 3, 2021, Glauberman, through KFG Properties, 

filed a Complaint (Assumpsit, Summary Possession/Landlord –

Tenant Damages) against Gonsalves in Civil No. 1DRC-21-0002121, 

alleging Gonsalves refused to vacate after a 45-day notice that 

the owners' son was moving in. 

Gonsalves filed counterclaims in both cases, alleging 

that Glauberman and Ramil were retaliating against her because 

she started withholding rent in October 2020, after complaining 

to them about the neighbor's yardman smoking while operating 

machinery to trim a hedge in close proximity to her rental unit. 

Gonsalves deemed that to be a fire hazard, and complained that 

the secondhand smoke from the neighbor's yardman smoking often 

came into her unit. Gonsalves stated that because Glauberman 

and Ramil did not resolve the issue, she reported it to her 

Section 8 Housing Assistance officer and withheld her portion of 

the rent. 

The district court heard Civil Nos. 1DRC-21-0001879 

and 1DRC-21-0002121 together for trial on the issue of 

possession. Gonsalves failed to appear twice in person for 

trial on the issue of possession, first on July 30, 2021, when 

she did not appear at all, and again on August 6, 2021, when she 
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

4

appeared by Zoom even though trial was scheduled to be in

person. Both times Gonsalves submitted notes from her doctor, 

and requested continuances due to medical reasons. The first 

time Gonsalves failed to appear, the district court rescheduled 

the trial to August 6, 2021. When Gonsalves failed to appear in 

person again on August 6, 2021, the district court instructed

Glauberman and Ramil to file motions for summary judgment, and 

the district court ultimately granted motions for summary 

judgment filed by them, leading Gonsalves to file these appeals. 

Gonsalves contends the district court committed the 

following errors in Civil No. 1DRC-21-0002121: (1) denying her 

July 8, 2021 non-hearing motion for continuance of the August 6, 

2021 trial; (2) instructing Glauberman, at the August 6, 2021 

hearing, to file a motion for summary judgment; (3) informing 

Glauberman, at an August 27, 2021 hearing, that the court would 

deny his motion for summary judgment but allowing him to 

withdraw the motion rather than ruling on the motion; (4)

denying Gonsalves's motion for reconsideration or new trial on 

September 24, 2021; (5) granting Glauberman summary judgment on 

possession on September 24, 2021; and (6) engaging in ex parte 

communications with Glauberman's counsel on September 10, 2021, 

when she was not present in the courtroom.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

5

Gonsalves contends the district court committed the 

following errors in Civil No. 1DRC-21-0001879: (1) denying her 

request for continuance made at the hearing on August 6, 2021; 

(2)instructing Glauberman and Ramil to file a motion for summary 

judgment at the August 6, 2021 hearing; (3) denying her request 

to continue the August 27, 2021 hearing on Glauberman and 

Ramil's motion for summary judgment; (4) granting Glauberman and 

Ramil's motion for summary judgment at the August 27, 2021 

hearing; (5) basing the August 27, 2021 grant of summary 

judgment on testimony given by Gonsalves in other cases; (6) 

notifying Glauberman and Ramil at the hearing held on 

September 10, 2021 that they attached the wrong copy of the 

rental agreement to their motion for summary judgment and had 

not given proper notice of their motion; (7) not bringing 

Gonsalves into the courtroom for the September 10, 2021 hearing; 

(8) granting Glauberman and Ramil summary judgment on 

September 24, 2021; and (9) denying Gonsalves's motion to 

dismiss at the September 24, 2021 hearing.

 Upon careful review of the record and the briefs 

submitted by the parties, and having given due consideration to 

the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties, we 

resolve Gonsalves's points of error as follows.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

6

We review the grant or denial of a continuance for an 

abuse of discretion. Sapp v. Wong, 62 Haw. 34, 41, 609 P.2d 

137, 142 (1980) (citations omitted). Generally, to constitute 

an abuse of discretion it must appear that the court clearly 

exceeded the bounds of reason or disregarded rules or principles 

of law or practice to the substantial detriment of a party 

litigant. Schmidt v. Bd. of Directors of Ass'n of Apartment 

Owners of Marco Polo Apartments, 73 Haw. 526, 533, 836 P.2d 479, 

483 (1992).

We review the grant or denial of summary judgment de

novo using the same standard applied by the district court. 

Nozawa v. Operating Engineers Loc. Union No. 3, 142 Hawaiʻi 331, 

338, 418 P.3d 1187, 1194 (2018) (citations omitted). Summary 

judgment is appropriate if the pleadings, depositions, answers 

to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the 

affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to 

any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a 

judgment as a matter of law. Id. at 342, 418 P.3d at 1198. A 

fact is material if proof of that fact would have the effect of 

establishing or refuting one of the essential elements of a 

cause of action or defense asserted by the parties. Id. The 

evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving parties. Id.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

7

We review a ruling on a motion to dismiss de novo. 

Young v. Allstate Ins. Co., 119 Hawaiʻi 403, 411, 198 P.3d 666, 

674 (2008). "A complaint should not be dismissed for failure to 

state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff 

can prove no set of facts in support of his or her claim that 

would entitle him or her to relief." Flores v. Logan, 151 Haw. 

357, 366, 513 P.3d 423, 432 (2022) (citations omitted).

We review the denial of a motion for new trial for 

abuse of discretion. Kato v. Funari, 118 Hawaiʻi 375, 381, 191

P.3d 1052, 1058 (2008) (citation omitted).

Gonsalves has not shown the district court abused its 

discretion in denying her requests for continuance of the 

August 6, 2021 hearing, and hearing the cases together. While 

we agree that the district court erred when it proceeded with 

the hearing and granted summary judgment on August 27, 2021, the 

error was harmless because the district court subsequently 

granted Gonsalves's motion to set aside the summary judgment.2 

The district court did not err when it granted summary 

judgment to Glauberman and Ramil on September 24, 2021 and 

2 The district court set aside its August 27, 2021 grant of summary 

judgment to Glauberman and Ramil because Glauberman and Ramil's motion for 

summary judgment was not filed and served at least ten days prior to the 

hearing, as required by District Court Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56(c), 

and Glauberman and Ramil attached an incomplete copy of their rental 

agreement with Gonsalves, which was missing the Section 8 Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) tenancy addendum.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

8

denied Gonsalves's September 22, 2021 motion to dismiss their 

complaint. Gonsalves alleged that Glauberman and Ramil were 

retaliating against her because she began withholding rent due 

to the neighbor's yardman smoking near her unit. Retaliatory 

eviction was not a valid defense for Gonsalves, however, because 

she admitted to withholding her portion of the rent starting in 

October 2020. Ryan v. Herzog, 142 Hawai‘i 278, 284, 418 P.3d 

619, 625 (2018) ("Once one of those three triggering [eviction 

under Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 521-74(a)] events occurs 

and the tenant continues to pay rent, the landlord is prohibited 

from retaliating by evicting the tenant, raising the rent, or 

decreasing services.") (emphasis added) (citing HRS § 521-74(a) 

(2018) (a "good faith" complaint to a "governmental agency 

concerned with landlord-tenant disputes of conditions in or 

affecting the tenant's dwelling unit" is a defense to a summary 

possession action provided that "the tenant continues to tender 

the usual rent to the landlord.")).

The Section 8 HUD tenancy addendum, which was part of 

Gonsalves's rental agreement, allows the landlord to terminate 

the tenancy for good cause, during the initial term of the 

lease, and to the extent permitted by state law thereafter. The 

record reflects that Gonsalves's tenancy was terminated after 

the initial term of the lease had ended. Gonsalves admitted 
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

9

that she had put a lock on the front water faucet, did not place 

her garbage in the trash bins, removed then glued back a light 

switch faceplate, and refused their request for an inspection, 

which were the reasons given by Glauberman and Ramil for issuing 

her a 10-day notice of termination of tenancy on February 9, 

2021. Gonsalves submitted a photograph of the glued light 

switch faceplate, taken on September 19, 2021 with her notation, 

"[f]aceplate can be changed in 48 hours by licensed 

electrician." Even assuming arguendo that those acts were not 

material breaches that would provide grounds for termination of 

the tenancy, HRS § 521-71(a) (2018) separately allows a month-tomonth tenancy to be terminated on a 45-day written notice. 

HRS § 521-71(1) (2018) ("When the tenancy is month-to-month, the 

landlord may terminate the rental agreement by notifying the 

tenant, in writing, at least forty-five days in advance of the 

anticipated termination."). That requirement was met. 

Gonsalves does not dispute that she received a 45-day notice of 

termination of tenancy, and the writ of possession and judgment 

for possession were issued by the district court after Hawai‘i's

COVID-19 eviction moratorium had expired.3 

3 Hawai‘i's COVID-19 eviction moratorium went into effect on 

April 17, 2020, with the issuance of Governor David Ige's Fifth Supplementary 

Proclamation on COVID-19, and was extended through August 6, 2021 with 

(continued . . .)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

10

Finally, there is no dispute that the district court 

should not have conducted the September 10, 2021 hearing while 

Gonsalves was left outside in a waiting room. However, there 

was no prejudice to Gonsalves by the district court proceeding 

with the hearing, with Gonsalves being absent, as the district 

court granted her motions and set aside the judgment. We also 

find that the district court did not err by directing Glauberman 

and Ramil to file a motion for summary judgment during the 

earlier August 6, 2021 hearing, and that the district court did 

not improperly give legal advice to Glauberman and Ramil. In 

directing Glauberman and Ramil to file motions for summary 

judgment, the district court balanced Gonsalves's request that 

trial on possession be postponed with Glauberman and Ramil's 

interest in having an expeditious resolution of their claim to 

recover possession. 

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district 

court's September 29, 2021 Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for 

(. . . continued)

Governor Ige's Twenty-First Supplementary Proclamation. Hawai‘i Emergency 

Proclamations are posted on the County of Hawai‘i website: 

https://coronavirus-response-county-of-hawaii-hawaiicountygis 

.hub.arcgis.com/documents/hawaiicountygis::5th-proclamation/explore

https://coronavirus-response-county-of-hawaii-hawaiicountygis 

.hub.arcgis.com/documents/hawaiicountygis::21st-proclamation/explore
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

11

Summary Judgment Filed on September 7, 2021, in favor of 

Glauberman in Civil No. 1DRC-21-0002121, and the October 4, 2021 

Judgment for Possession, in favor of Glauberman and Ramil in 

Civil No. 1DRC-21-0001879, and reject all points of error raised 

by Gonsalves in these appeals. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, January 19, 2024.

On the briefs:

Celeste M. Gonsalves,

Self-represented

Defendant-Appellant.

Jean Malia Orque,

for Plaintiffs-Appellees

Stuart B. Glauberman and

Vicky Ramil 

in CAAP-21-0000545.

Stuart B. Glauberman,

by his Managing Agent,

KFG Properties, Inc.,

Self-represented 

Plaintiff-Appellee

in CAAP-21-0000536.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard

Acting Chief Judge

/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka

Associate Judge

/s/ Kimberly T. Guidry

Associate Judge