Ruggles v. Yagong ( 2014 )

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCWC-13-0000117
14-MAR-2014
02:56 PM
SCWC-13-0000117
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
MICHAEL DOYLE RUGGLES, REV. NANCY WAITE HARRIS,
KENNETH V. MIYAMOTO-SLAUGHTER, WENDY TATUM,
DAVID TATUM, and ROBERT S. MURRAY,
Petitioners/Plaintiffs-Appellants,
and
GEORGE HERMAN KLARE, BARBARA JEAN LANG,
Respondents/Plaintiffs-Appellees,
vs.
DOMINIC YAGONG, DONALD IKEDA, J. YOSHIMOTO, DENNIS ONISHI,
FRED BLAS, BRITTANY SMART, BRENDA FORD, ANGEL PILAGO,
and PETE HOFFMAN, current Hawai'i County Council members;
JAY KIMURA, Hawai'i County Prosecutor; MITCHELL ROTH and
CHARLENE IBOSHI, Deputy Prosecuting Attorneys;
BILLY KENOI, Hawai'i County Chief of Police,
KELLY GREENWELL, GUY ENRIQUES, and EMILY NAEOLE,
previous Hawai'i County Council members,
Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.
CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
(CAAP-13-0000117; CIV. NO. 11-1-117)
ORDER DISMISSING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.
and Circuit Judge Crandall, assigned by reason of vacancy)
It appearing that the judgment on appeal in the above-
referenced matter not having been filed by the Intermediate Court
of Appeals at the time Petitioners’ “notice of appeal” was filed,
see Hawai'i Revised Statutes § 602-59(a)-(b) (Supp. 2013); see
also Hawai'i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 36(b)(1)
(2013),
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioners’ “notice of
appeal” that was refiled in SCWC-13-0000117, on March 6, 2014, is
dismissed without prejudice to re-filing the application pursuant
to HRAP Rule 40.1(a) (2013) (“The application shall be filed
within thirty days after the filing of the intermediate court of
appeals’ judgment on appeal or dismissal order, unless the time
for filing the application is extended in accordance with this
rule.”).1
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, March 14, 2014.
Michael D. Ruggles, /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
Rev. Nancy Waite Harris,
Kenneth V. Miyamoto-Slaughter, /s/ Paula A. Nakayama
Wendy Tatum, David Tatum,
and Robert S. Murray, /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
petitioners pro se
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Virginia L. Crandall
1
HRAP Rule 40.1(a) (2013) further provides:
(2) REQUEST EXTENDING TIME; TIME TO FILE. A party may
extend the time to file an application for a writ of
certiorari by filing a written request for an extension.
The request for extension shall be filed no later than 30
days after entry of the intermediate court of appeals’
judgment on appeal or dismissal order.
(3) TIMELY REQUEST; AUTOMATIC EXTENSION; NOTICE. Upon
receipt of a timely written request, the appellate clerk
shall extend the time for filing the application to the
sixtieth day after entry of the intermediate court of
appeals’ judgment or dismissal order. The appellate clerk
shall note on the record that the extension was granted. The
clerk shall give notice the request is timely and granted.
(4) NO EXTENSION IF UNTIMELY. An untimely request shall not
extend the time. The clerk shall give notice the request is
untimely and denied.
2