CourtListener 10830651•Psak v. Kardash
Texto completo
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
31-MAR-2026
08:05 AM
Dkt. 79 SO
NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI
JERRE PSAK, Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
KEITH KARDASH, Respondent-Appellant.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
HONOLULU DIVISION
(CIVIL NO. 1DSS-XX-XXXXXXX)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, Hiraoka and McCullen, JJ.)
Self-represented Respondent-Appellant Keith Kardash
appeals from the District Court of the First Circuit's
November 26, 2024 summary denial of his post-judgment "Expedited
Non-Hearing Ex Parte Motion for an Order Staying Enforcement of
First Amended Injunction Against Harassment Filed on 11/1/23
Pending a Court Hearing on Respondent's Non-Hearing Motion for
an Order Clarifiying [sic] the Vague and Ambiguous Special
Conditions 1 and 2 of the First Amended Injunction Against
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Harassment Filed on 11/1/23, Filed on 7/30/24, and on
Respondent's Non-Hearing Motion for a Court Order Allowing
Respondent to Play the Violin" (Order Denying Motion to Stay). 1
(Formatting altered.) The First Amended Injunction Against
Harassment was entered in favor of his neighbor, Petitioner-
Appellee Jerre Psak, on November 1, 2023, pursuant to Hawaiʻi
Revised Statutes § 604-10.5 (2016 & Supp. 2023). 2
Kardash's opening brief consists of two sentences:
Judge Chris A.K. Thomas and Judge David Hayakawa were
biased, failed to support their decisions with evidence,
testimony or legal basis, abused their power and violated
the Hawaii Revised Code of Judicial Conduct. This
Honorable Court should reverse Judge Thomas' and Judge
Hayakawa's decisions, vacate Petitioner-Appellee JERRE
PSAK'S injunction and award Respondent-Appellant KEITH D.
KARDASH with attorney's fees and costs.
See Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 28(b)
(setting forth opening brief requirements); HRAP Rule 1(d)
("Attorneys and pro se parties are deemed to be aware of, and
are expected to comply with, all of the provisions of these
rules."). No answering brief was filed.
Kardash appears to seek reversal of the district
court's various orders, vacatur of the First Amended Injunction
Against Harassment, and an award of attorneys' fees. However,
1 The Honorable David M. Hayakawa entered the November 26, 2024 Order
Denying Motion to Stay.
2 The Honorable Chris A.K. Thomas entered the November 1, 2023 First
Amended Injunction Against Harassment. There was no appeal from this
injunction. Thus, we have no jurisdiction to review the First Amended
Injunction Against Harassment.
2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Kardash appeals from the Order Denying Motion to Stay and
presents no discernible argument upon which this court can
conclude the district court abused its discretion as to that
order. See Erum v. Llego, 147 Hawaiʻi 368, 380, 465 P.3d 815,
827 (2020) (requiring self-represented filings to be liberally
construed "so long as the litigant's argument can reasonably be
discerned").
Based on the foregoing, we affirm the district court's
November 26, 2024 Order Denying Motion to Stay.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, March 31, 2026.
On the briefs: /s/ Katherine G. Leonard
Presiding Judge
Keith Kardash,
Self-represented /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
Respondent-Appellant. Associate Judge
/s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
Associate Judge
3
Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.