Kaiama v. Boyd ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •    NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
    Electronically Filed
    Intermediate Court of Appeals
    CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
    16-JUN-2022
    07:56 AM
    Dkt. 45 SO
    NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
    IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
    OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
    AZIZI KAIAMA, Respondent-Appellant,
    v.
    TODD BOYD, Petitioner-Appellee
    APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT
    WAILUKU DIVISION
    (CASE NO. 2DSS-XX-XXXXXXX)
    SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
    (By:     Ginoza, Chief Judge, Hiraoka and McCullen, JJ.)
    Self-represented Respondent-Appellant Azizi Kaiama
    appeals from the "Order Granting Petition for Injunction Against
    Harassment" entered by the District Court of the Second Circuit,
    Wailuku Division, on July 12, 2021.1 For the reasons explained
    below, we affirm the Injunction.
    Petitioner-Appellee Todd Boyd filed a "Petition for Ex
    Parte Temporary Restraining Order and for Injunction Against
    Harassment" against Kaiama on April 21, 2021.2 A "Temporary
    Restraining Order Against Harassment" was entered on April 21,
    1
    The Honorable Douglas J. Sameshima presided.
    2
    Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 604-10.5 (2016 & Supp. 2021)
    authorizes the district court to enjoin harassment.
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
    2021.3 An evidentiary hearing was held on July 12, 2021.              The
    following exchange took place:
    THE COURT: Okay. So wait, wait. Wait, wait, wait.
    So your request is to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Is
    that what you're saying?
    MS. KAIAMA: Yes, vacate order because they are
    trespassing on crown land.
    The district court denied Kaiama's request to dismiss
    and heard testimony from Boyd. Kaiama declined to be sworn in,
    stating, "I am a royal and this is a domestic courtroom and my
    rights have been violated." She did not call any witnesses or
    present any evidence. The district court ruled:
    As to today's proceeding, the Court is going to find that
    the petitioner has presented clear and convincing evidence
    that harassment, that is an intentional or knowing course of
    conduct directed at an individual that seriously alarms or
    disturbs consistently and continually bothers the individual
    serves no legitimate purpose --
    MS. KAIAMA:   I live on the property --
    THE COURT: -- provided, ah, such conduct would cause
    a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress.
    The Petition was granted. The Injunction was entered
    on July 12, 2021. This appeal followed.4
    We discern Kaiama's argument to be that the district
    court had no jurisdiction over her because she is descended from
    Hawaiian royalty, and Boyd was trespassing on royal lands. The
    Hawai#i Supreme Court has held:
    [W]hatever may be said regarding the lawfulness of its
    origins, the State of Hawai#i is now a lawful government.
    Individuals claiming to be citizens of the Kingdom and not
    of the State are not exempt from application of the State's
    laws.
    3
    The Honorable Michelle L. Drewyer presided.
    4
    Kaiama's opening brief does not comply with Rule 28(b) of the
    Hawai#i Rules of Appellate Procedure. Nevertheless, the Hawai#i Supreme Court
    instructs that to promote access to justice, pleadings prepared by self-
    represented litigants should be interpreted liberally, and self-represented
    litigants should not automatically be foreclosed from appellate review because
    they fail to comply with court rules. Erum v. Llego, 147 Hawai#i 368, 380-81,
    
    465 P.3d 815
    , 827-28 (2020).
    2
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
    State v. Kaulia, 128 Hawai#i 479, 487, 
    291 P.3d 377
    , 385 (2013)
    (cleaned up). Kaiama does not contend, nor does the record
    establish, that the evidence was insufficient to support the
    district court's decision, or that the district court misapplied
    the law.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Injunction entered by
    the district court on July 12, 2021, is affirmed.
    DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, June 16, 2022.
    On the briefs:
    /s/ Lisa M. Ginoza
    Azizi Kaiama,                         Chief Judge
    Self-represented
    Respondent-Appellant.                 /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
    Associate Judge
    Jack R. Naiditch,
    for Petitioner-Appellee.              /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
    Associate Judge
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CAAP-21-0000417

Filed Date: 6/16/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/16/2022