Lewis v. Benacquista

── Lewis v. Benacquista ── Court: Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals Date: April 13, 2026 Category: General NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 13-APR-2026 09:12 AM Dkt. 37 SO NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI DAVID WILLIAM LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellee, v. MIKE BENACQUISTA, Respondent-Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT NORTH AND SOUTH KONA DIVISION (CASE NO. 3DSS-XX-XXXXXXX) SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Nakasone, Chief Judge, McCullen and Guidry, JJ.) Respondent-Appellant Mike Benacquista appeals from District Court of the Third Circuit's March 22, 2024 Order Granting Petition for Injunction Against Harassment entered in favor of Petitioner-Appellee David William Lewis. 1 On appeal, Benacquista contends the circuit court improperly extended the fifteen-day requirement to commence a 1 The Honorable Kimberly B. Tsuchiya presided over both underlying cases at issue in this appeal. NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER hearing on the merits by allowing Lewis "to 'refile' his petition while a prior [temporary restraining order (TRO) was] still in place," violating his due process rights. 2 Upon careful review of the record and the briefs submitted by the parties, and having given due consideration to the issues raised and the arguments advanced, we resolve this appeal as discussed below and affirm. This appeal involves two underlying district court cases: 3DSS-XX-XXXXXXX (First Case) and 3DSS-XX-XXXXXXX (Second Case). The First Case In the First Case, Lewis filed an ex parte petition for a TRO on January 24, 2024, and a TRO issued on the same day. The petition was served on January 30. On February 5, Benacquista moved to dismiss the petition asserting the district court lacked jurisdiction for lack of "lawful service." For this motion, Benacquista relied 2 In his points of error, Benacquista also contends the district court violated its "duty to 'cold neutrality of an impartial judge.'" Benacquista argues, "Instead of simply dismissing the First Petition, the District Court advised [Lewis] that he could refile his petition, and that the Court would waive the filing fees." However, Benacquista does not point to where in the record he objected or brought this issue to the district court's attention. See Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 28(b)(4) (requiring points of error to set forth where the error was objected to or brought to the court's attention). Accordingly, we disregard this contention. See id. ("Points not presented in accordance with this section will be disregarded[.]"). 2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER on the District Court Rules of Civil Procedure (DCRCP) Rules 7 and 12(b). 3 Six days after service of the petition, on February 6, the district court held a hearing on the matter. The record on appeal contains no transcript of this hearing. Based on the district court's minutes, Lewis appeared self-represented and Benacquista appeared represented by counsel. Benacquista challenged service as improper and moved to dismiss. The district court continued the case to February 13 for a hearing on the motion to dismiss and extended the T