Wideman v. Hawaii Paroling Authority

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
05-FEB-2026
08:00 AM
Dkt. 41 SO

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

LONNELL REGINALD WIDEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
HAWAII PAROLING AUTHORITY;
NEXSTAR MEDIA, INC., misidentified as KHON 2,
Defendants-Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
(CIVIL NO. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Nakasone, Chief Judge, Leonard and McCullen, JJ.)
Self-represented Plaintiff-Appellant Lonnell Reginald

Wideman (Wideman) appeals from the December 26, 2025 Final

Judgment (Judgment) entered by the Circuit Court of the First

Circuit (Circuit Court).1 Wideman also challenges the Circuit

Court's January 10, 2023 Order Granting Defendant Nexstar Media,

Inc., misidentified as KHON 2's [(Nexstar's)] Motion to Dismiss

Complaint, as Amended, or in the Alternative, for Summary

Judgment on Any and All Claims Asserted against KHON 2 [Dkt. 115]

filed July 8, 2022 (Order Granting July 8, 2022 MSJ) and the

1
The Honorable Shirley M. Kawamura entered the Judgment.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

October 4, 2023 Order Denying Leave to Amend and Order of

Dismissal (Order Denying Leave to Amend).2

Liberally construing Wideman's opening brief, Wideman

contends that the Circuit Court: (1) erred in entering the Order

Granting July 8, 2022 MSJ; and (2) erred and abused its

discretion in entering the Order Denying Leave to Amend.

Upon careful review of the record and the briefs

submitted by the parties, and having given due consideration to

the arguments advanced and the issues raised, we resolve this

appeal as follows:

Wideman argues that the Circuit Court erred in granting

Nexstar's July 8, 2022 Motion to Dismiss Complaint, as Amended,

or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment on Any and All Claims

Asserted against KHON 2 (July 8, 2022 MSJ) because: (a) Nexstar

was not properly named in the complaint, (b) Nexstar failed to

submit its proposed order within ten days of the Circuit Court

announcing its decision, (c) the Circuit Court erred in

determining that Nexstar did not defame him, (d) the Circuit

Court misapplied the doctrine of res judicata, and (e) the

Circuit Court erred in its determination that Wideman's claims

were time barred.

Wideman further argues that the Circuit Court abused

its discretion when it denied him leave to amend the complaint

because he was diligently attempting to serve Defendants and to

amend his claims and there was no prior notice given of the

court's intent to dismiss.

2
The Honorable Jeffrey P. Crabtree entered the Order Granting
July 8, 2022 MSJ and the Order Denying Leave to Amend.

2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

If a party misnamed in a complaint is served and

appears, the court has jurisdiction over the improperly named

party. Kajiya v. Dep't of Water Supply, 2 Haw. App. 221, 223,

629 P.2d 635, 638 (1981) (misnaming the Board of Water Supply as

the Department of Water Supply did not render the summons

insufficient) (citations omitted). Because Nexstar appeared when

it filed the July 8, 2022 MSJ, the Circuit Court had jurisdiction

over Nexstar and to decide the July 8, 2022 MSJ.

The fact that the order granting Nexstar's July 8, 2022

MSJ was entered more than ten days following the announcement of

the Circuit Court's ruling did not void the order. Rhoads v.

Okamura, 98 Hawai i 407, 410, 49 P.3d 373, 376 (2002)

(recognizing that Rules of the Circuit Courts of the State of

Hawaii Rule 23 is a procedural provision to expedite the court's

business, and failure to submit a judgment within ten days of an

order granting motion for summary judgment did not void the

judgment), overruled on other grounds by Alford v. City & Cnty.

of Honolulu, 109 Hawai i 14, 23, 122 P.3d 809, 818 (2005).

With the July 8, 2022 MSJ, Nexstar submitted scripts of

the broadcasts it ran in 2012 that mentioned Wideman. The

scripts say that Wideman's ex-wife has been missing since May 13,

2012, police were conducting an investigation into her

disappearance, Wideman is not a suspect in his ex-wife's

disappearance, and Wideman is cooperating with the investigation

but he was arrested on a parole violation.

Wideman did not submit any opposition to the July 8,

2022 MSJ. Wideman does not point to any fact that would

establish that any of the statements Nexstar made about him in

3
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

its 2012 broadcasts were untrue. Truth is a defense to

defamation. Wilson v. Freitas, 121 Hawai i 120, 128, 214 P.3d

1110, 1118 (App. 2009) (citing Gonsalves v. Nissan Motor Corp. in

Haw., Ltd., 100 Hawai i 149, 173, 58 P.3d 1196, 1220 (2002)). We

conclude that the Circuit Court did not err in determining that

there was no evidence of defamation.

Res judicata, or claim preclusion, prohibits a party

from relitigating a previously adjudicated cause of action.

Eastern Sav. Bank, FSB v. Esteban, 129 Hawai i 154, 158, 296 P.3d

1062, 1066 (2013) (citing Bremer v. Weeks, 104 Hawai i 43, 54, 85

P.3d 150, 161 (2004)). "[R]es judicata precludes not only the

relitigation of claims or defense that were litigated in a

previous lawsuit, but also of all claims and defenses that might

have been properly litigated, but were not litigated or decided."

Id. at 159, 296 P.3d at 1067 (citing Restatement (Second) of

Judgments, §§ 18 & 22 (A.L.I. 1982)).

In Wideman's complaint, as amended on July 18, 2022

(Amended Complaint), Wideman alleged that he was a Hawai i State

prisoner serving a life sentence with the possibility of parole.

The Amended Complaint further alleged that on May 18, 2012, while

on parole, Wideman was arrested for allegedly failing to notify

his parole officer regarding three separate contacts he had with

law enforcement between July 26, 2011, and May 18, 2012, and his

parole was revoked following a July 16, 2012 parole revocation

hearing. It further alleged that Nexstar wrongfully broadcasted

to the public his criminal history and an allegedly unlawful

parole revocation arrest.

4
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Wideman made these same allegations in an April 15,

2020 complaint (USDC Complaint) that he filed in the United

States District Court for the District of Hawaii (District

Court), which the District Court dismissed with prejudice on May

18, 2020.

The District Court had jurisdiction to decide the

claims in the April 15, 2020 Complaint, which alleged that

Wideman's 2012 arrest and parole revocation deprived him of his

rights under the United States and Hawai i Constitutions and that

media companies, including Nexstar, broadcasted allegedly

defamatory information about him. Federal law, 28 U.S.C. §§

1331, 1367(a), grants United States District Courts original

jurisdiction over all civil actions arising under the

Constitution and supplemental jurisdiction over related claims.

Even if the claims in the Amended Complaint differed somewhat

from those in the USDC Complaint, Wideman presents no discernible

argument why he would have been unable to litigate such claims in

the District Court. Therefore, we conclude that the Circuit

Court did not err in dismissing the Amended Complaint based on

res judicata.

Finally, there is no abuse of discretion when a court

denies leave to amend if amendment would be futile. Off. of

Hawaiian Affs. v. State, 110 Hawai i 338, 365, 133 P.3d 767, 794

(2006). In light of the above, further amendment would have been

futile. Therefore, we need not reach Wideman's remaining

assertions of error.

5
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Accordingly, the Circuit Court's December 26, 2025

Judgment is affirmed. Wideman's June 24, 2024 "Motion for an

Expedited Appeal or in the Alternative for a Resolution at the

Possible Earliest" is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, February 5, 2026.

On the briefs: /s/ Karen T. Nakasone
Chief Judge
Lonnell Reginald Widemand,
Plaintiff-Appellant, pro se. /s/ Katherine G. Leonard
Associate Judge
Bruce D. Voss,
John D. Ferry III, /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
(Lung Rose Voss & Wagnild), Associate Judge
for Defendant-Appellee
Nexstar Media, Inc.,
misidentified as KHON 2.

6