Court Opinion

ID: 9957948
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-05 19:02:37.595362+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:17:33.587677
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

                                            Electronically Filed
                                            Intermediate Court of Appeals
                                            CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
                                            05-APR-2024
                                            08:29 AM
                                            Dkt. 97 SO

                         NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

                IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
                       OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I

      CITIBANK N.A. AS TRUSTEE OF STRUCTURED ASSET MORTGAGE
       INVESTMENTS II TRUST 2007-AR2 MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH
        CERTIFICATES SERIES 2007-AR2, Plaintiff-Appellee,
                                 v.
  DAYNA S. KAULIA-WEBB, individually and as Trustee of the KA
    HILINA O MAKA IRREVOCABLE TRUST dated February 23, 2008,
                       Defendant-Appellant,
                                and
 DEBRA M. AYALA, as trustee of the KA HILINA O MAKA IRREVOCABLE
TRUST dated February 23, 2008; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION
     SYSTEMS, INC., solely as nominee for COMMUNITY LENDING
          INCORPORATED; COMMUNITY LENDING INCORPORATED;
                       Defendants-Appellees
                                and
   JOHN and MARY DOES 1-20, DOE PARTNERSHIPS, CORPORATIONS OR
                       OTHER ENTITIES 1-20,
                            Defendants

         APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT
                       (CIVIL NO. 08-1-401(2))

                      SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
  (By:    Wadsworth, Presiding Judge, Nakasone and McCullen, JJ.)
            Self-represented Defendant-Appellant Dayna S. Kaulia-
Webb (Kaulia-Webb) appeals from the September 18, 2019
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Judgment, 1 entered by the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit
(Circuit Court) 2 in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Wilmington Trust,
NA, Successor Trustee to Citibank, N.A., as Trustee, for the
Benefit of Registered Holders of Structured Asset Mortgage
Investments II Trust 2007-AR2, Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2007-AR2 (Wilmington).
            Upon review of the record on appeal and relevant legal
authorities, giving due consideration to any discernible issues
raised and arguments advanced by the parties, we affirm.
            Kaulia-Webb filed a November 6, 2019 "Affidavit of
Appeal/Jurat Brief" and "Affidavit of Appeal/Jurat Brief On
support of argument," which we construe as an Opening Brief
(collectively, Opening Brief). 3       The Opening Brief does not
comply with HRAP Rule 28(b) in multiple respects, both in form
and substance, and does not contain record references.             Nor does
the record contain transcripts of the August 21, 2019 hearing on
Wilmington's Motion for Confirmation of Sale that led to the
Judgment from which Kaulia-Webb appeals.          See HRAP Rule
10(b)(1)(A).

      1     In the Notice of Appeal, Kaulia-Webb appeals from a "Judgment
Order entered in this action on August 21, 2019." The record, however,
reflects no August 21, 2019 Judgment, but contains a Judgment filed on
September 18, 2019, following an August 21, 2019 hearing on Wilmington's
"Motion for Confirmation of Sale, Distribution of Proceeds, and for Writ of
Ejectment" (Motion for Confirmation of Sale). The Circuit Court granted the
motion and filed an order confirming sale, followed by the September 18, 2019
Judgment. We construe Kaulia-Webb's notice to appeal from this Judgment.

      2     The Honorable Peter T. Cahill presided.

       3     The "Affidavit of Appeal/Jurat Brief" consists of 193 pages
including "unrebutted (exhibits) affidavits," which do not indicate where,
and whether, they are a part of the record on appeal in this case. See
Hawai‘i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 28(a) (requiring that an
opening brief "shall not exceed 35 pages"); Alford v. City & Cnty. of
Honolulu, 109 Hawai‘i 14, 25 n.18, 122 P.3d 809, 820 n.18 (2005) ("References
and appendices not part of the record on appeal cannot be considered. This
is a violation of HRAP Rule 10 . . . .") (citation omitted); Bettencourt v.
Bettencourt, 80 Hawai‘i 225, 229 n.2, 909 P.2d 553, 557 n.2 (1995) (holding
that matters outside the record on appeal may neither be appended nor
referred to in an appellate brief) (citation omitted).

                                      2
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

            While appellate courts endeavor to afford liberal
review to pleadings by self-represented litigants "to facilitate
access to justice" and to afford opportunity for appellate
review despite their non-compliance with court rules, Kaulia-
Webb's Opening Brief does not present comprehensible or
discernible legal argument.       See Erum v. Llego, 147 Hawai‘i 368,

380-81, 465 P.3d 815, 827-28 (2020) (citations omitted).
Appellate review is not possible.          See HRAP Rule 28(b); Marvin
v. Pflueger, 127 Hawai‘i 490, 496, 280 P.3d 88, 94 (2012)
(requiring appellate courts to "adhere[ ] to the policy of
affording litigants the opportunity to have their cases heard on
the merits, where possible" (emphasis added) (cleaned up)). 4
            For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the September 18,
2019 Judgment, entered by the Circuit Court of the Second
Circuit.
            DATED:   Honolulu, Hawai‘i, April 5, 2024.
On the briefs:
                                          /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
Dayna S. Kaulia-Webb,
                                          Presiding Judge
Self-represented Defendant-
Appellant.
                                          /s/ Karen T. Nakasone
                                          Associate Judge
Lansen H. G. Leu,
for Plaintiff-Appellee.
                                          /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
                                          Associate Judge

      4     Wilmington argues that the appeal "should be dismissed" because
Kaulia-Webb's "brief does not comply" with HRAP Rule 28(b), "is wholly
incomprehensible[,]" and that it "cannot properly respond to arguments that
are incoherent and lack any justification."
                                      3