D.R. v. T.R.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
10-APR-2025
08:45 AM
Dkt. 106 SO

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

D.R., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T.R., Defendant-Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE FAMILY COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT
(CASE NO. 3FDV-XX-XXXXXXX)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Wadsworth, JJ.)

D.R., representing himself, appeals from the "Decision
and Order on All Pending Motions as of August 8, 2024" entered by
the Family Court of the Third Circuit on August 8, 2024.1 We
affirm.
D.R. filed for divorce from T.R. on October 27, 2022.
A divorce decree was entered on December 13, 2022. According to
the transcript of a June 1, 2023 hearing, D.R. filed a number of
post-decree motions: "request for modification, motion to seal,
motion to dismiss [T.R.]'s motion, motion for post-decree relief,
and also [D.R.]'s motion to seal." According to the Decision and
Order, evidentiary hearings were held on July 25, 2024, and
August 1, 2024. The record on appeal does not contain
transcripts of the evidentiary hearings.2 The family court

1
The Honorable Jeffrey W. Ng presided.
2
"The burden is upon appellant in an appeal to show error by
reference to matters in the record, and he or she has the responsibility of
providing an adequate transcript." Bettencourt v. Bettencourt, 80 Hawai#i
(continued...)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

announced its decision during an August 8, 2024 hearing. The
Decision and Order was entered on August 8, 2024. This appeal
followed.
D.R.'s opening brief does not comply with Hawai#i Rules
of Appellate Procedure Rule 28(b). To promote access to justice,
we liberally interpret a self-represented litigant's briefs and
do not automatically foreclose them 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). But D.R.'s brief does
not contain any citations to where in the record his post-decree
motions or any evidence presented to the family court can be
found. We are not obligated to search the record for information
that should have been provided by D.R. Hawaii Ventures, LLC v.
Otaka, Inc., 114 Hawai#i 438, 480, 164 P.3d 696, 738 (2007). Nor
does the brief contain any factual or legal argument about why
the Decision and Order was clearly erroneous or wrong. The only
argument we discern is a request that this court "do the right
thing[.]"
"The law is clear in this jurisdiction that the
appellant has the burden of furnishing the appellate court with a
sufficient record to positively show the alleged error."
Bettencourt, 80 Hawai#i at 230, 909 P.2d at 558. D.R. has not
shown any error. Accordingly, the "Decision and Order on All
Pending Motions as of August 8, 2024" entered by the family court
on August 8, 2024, is affirmed.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, April 10, 2025.

On the briefs:
/s/ Katherine G. Leonard
D.R., Self-represented Acting Chief Judge
Plaintiff-Appellant.
/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
T.R., Self-represented Associate Judge
Defendant-Appellee.
/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
Associate Judge

2
(...continued)
225, 230, 909 P.2d 553, 558 (1995) (brackets omitted).

2