Court Opinion

ID: 9930386
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-06 19:03:44.222497+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:08:22.943142
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

                                             Electronically Filed
                                             Intermediate Court of Appeals
                                             CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
                                             06-FEB-2024
                                             07:58 AM
                                             Dkt. 37 SO

                        NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

               IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

                      OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

              PEI LI, Claimant-Appellant-Appellant,
                                 v.
          KYO-YA OHANA, LLC, Employer-Appellee-Appellee
                                and
            ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES,
           Third-Party Administrator-Appellee-Appellee

  APPEAL FROM THE LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS APPEALS BOARD
          (CASE NO. AB 2018-076 AND DCD NO. 2-13-05568)

                     SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
 (By:   Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Wadsworth, JJ.)

          Pei Li filed this appeal without counsel.       His notice
of appeal was filed by the Hawai#i Labor and Industrial Relations
Appeals Board (LIRAB) on July 29, 2019. It appears he is
appealing from the Decision and Order entered by LIRAB on July 3,
2019.
          Li's opening brief does not comply with Hawai#i Rules
of Appellate Procedure Rule 28(b). A self-represented litigant's
pleadings should be interpreted liberally, and they should not
automatically be foreclosed from appellate review because they do
not comply with court rules. Erum v. Llego, 147 Hawai#i 368,
380-81, 465 P.3d 815, 827-28 (2020). However, Li's brief has no
statement of points of error and no argument. It consists of
medical records and reports, with no explanation of why they are
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

material to this appeal, or why LIRAB's Decision and Order was
clearly erroneous or wrong.
           We are not obligated to search the record for
information that should have been provided by Li. Hawaii
Ventures, LLC v. Otaka, Inc., 114 Hawai#i 438, 480, 164 P.3d 696,
738 (2007) (first citing Lanai Co., Inc. v. Land Use Comm'n, 105
Hawai#i 296, 309 n.31, 97 P.3d 372, 385 n.31 (2004) (explaining
that an appellate court "is not obligated to sift through the
voluminous record to verify an appellant's inadequately
documented contentions" (citations omitted)); and then citing
Miyamoto v. Lum, 104 Hawai#i 1, 11 n.14, 84 P.3d 509, 519 n.14
(2004)). Accordingly, the Decision and Order entered by LIRAB on
July 3, 2019, is affirmed.
           DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 6, 2024.

On the briefs:
                                      /s/ Katherine G. Leonard
Pei Li,                               Acting Chief Judge
Self-represented Claimant-
Appellant-Appellant.                  /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
                                      Associate Judge
Brian G.S. Choy,
Keith M. Yonamine,                    /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
for Employer-Appellee-                Associate Judge
Appellee and Third-Party
Administrator-Appellee-
Appellee.

                                  2