Honma v. Aana

── Honma v. Aana ── Court: Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals Date: April 13, 2026 Category: General NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 13-APR-2026 08:07 AM Dkt. 29 SO NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I RUSSELL HONMA, Plaintiff-Appellant v. SHEANA K. AANA, MAHINA K. HOMALON, SAMSON M. AND UILLANI K. AANA, Defendants-Appellees APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT NORTH AND SOUTH HILO DIVISION (CASE NO. 3DRC-XX-XXXXXXX) SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Wadsworth, Presiding Judge, and McCullen and Guidry, JJ.) This appeal stems from a landlord-tenant dispute in which the trial court dismissed without prejudice self- represented Plaintiff-Appellant Russell Honma's (Honma) complaint for summary possession, unpaid rent, and damages against Defendants-Appellees Sheana K. Aana, Mahina K. Homalon, Samson M. Aana, and Uillani K. Aana (together, Defendants). Honma appeals from the Order Granting Dismissal Without Prejudice of All Claims in Complaint Filed October 3, 2023 (Dismissal Order), entered on March 23, 2026, by the District Court of the Third Circuit, North and South Hilo Division (District Court).1/ Following a March 20, 2024 bench trial, the District Court orally dismissed Honma's complaint without prejudice because he "filed [the] matter 1/ The Honorable M. Kanani Laubach presided.  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER prematurely . . . ."2/ The Dismissal Order similarly states that "[t]he claims were not ripe upon filing the complaint." On appeal, Honma appears to contend that the District Court erred in dismissing the complaint without prejudice because "[Honma] has given more sufficient time then [sic] 45 days notice to vacant [sic] the house on the month-to-month rental."3/ He argues that "the Defendant never moved out and clean out the house, making damages to the house . . . ." No answering brief was filed. After reviewing the record on appeal and the relevant legal authorities, and giving due consideration to the issues raised and the arguments advanced by the parties, we resolve Honma's contentions as follows and affirm. The complaint, along with the attached eviction notice and rental agreement, indicated that Defendants became month-to- month tenants of Honma's property in 2019 at the end of a fixed term that began on November 1, 2018.4/ The eviction notice, dated September 15, 2023, stated, among other things, that "[w]ithin 45 days of the next payment date, you are hereby required to quit and deliver possession of the Premises in accordance with your Lease." Honma alleged in the complaint that the eviction notice "was given to Defendant on . . . Sept[ember] 15, 2023, . . . to correct this situation as follows: . . . 45-day termination of 2/ On March 20, 2026, we temporarily remanded the case to the District Court for entry of an appealable dismissal order, which was then entered on March 23, 2026. 3/ Honma's opening brief fails to comply in numerous material respects with Hawai#i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 28(b). In particular, Honma fails to provide: (1) "[a] concise statement of the points of error set forth in separately numbered paragraphs[,]" as required by HRAP Rule 28(b)(4); and (2) a statement of "where in the record the alleged error[s were] objected to or the manner in which the alleged error[s were] brought