Opinion ID: 2599393
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Counterclaim Against Buscher and Motion for Interpleader and Dismissal

Text: As their fifth and sixth points of error, Defendants contend that the circuit court erred in: (1) dismissing their motion for interpleader and dismissal for the reasons stated in the Motion for Interpleader and For Dismissal Filed October 12, 2000; and (2) denying their counterclaim against Buscher for the reasons stated in their Memoranda in Opposition to the motions. Buscher replies that these points of error should be deemed waived pursuant to HRAP Rule 28(b)(7) because Defendants fail to provide an argument, citations to authorities, statutes, and parts of the record upon which they relied. Inasmuch as Defendants indeed do not have a corresponding argument section for either their fifth or sixth points of error, and only direct this court to look at previously filed memoranda, we deem these points of error waived. See HRAP Rule 28(b)(7) (stating that an opening brief should contain [t]he argument, containing the contentions of the appellant on the points presented and the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes and parts of the record relied on. . . . Points not argued may be deemed waived). [14] If we were to accept Defendants' previously filed memoranda as Defendants' argument in support of these points of error, and thus, part of their opening brief, Defendants would be in violation of HRAP Rule 28(a), which states that an opening . . . brief shall not exceed 35 pages[.] Accordingly, Defendants' fifth and sixth points of error are waived.