SCUTT v. MAUI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL (2021)

Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawai‘i.2021-04-29No. NO. CAAP-20-0000466

Summary · law.co

Holding. The Supreme Court of Hawai'i affirmed the district court's order dismissing the case without prejudice, as the district court possessed inherent power to dismiss for want of prosecution and Scutt presented no argument challenging the propriety of that dismissal.

Jason Scutt, representing himself, appealed a district court order dismissing his civil complaint against Maui Memorial Hospital without prejudice. Although Scutt's appellate brief did not fully comply with procedural rules, the Supreme Court of Hawai'i addressed the merits of his appeal out of respect for self-represented litigants' access to justice. The case arose after Scutt filed a complaint on June 29, 2020, with a summons setting a return date of July 20, 2020. On that date, the case was called in court, but neither Scutt nor the hospital's attorney appeared, and the district court dismissed the case without prejudice.

The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, finding that the district court possessed inherent authority to dismiss cases for want of prosecution under both common law and statutory authority. Scutt provided no argument in his appellate brief explaining why the dismissal was improper, leaving the lower court's decision undisturbed.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Authority of district courts to dismiss for want of prosecution
Procedural requirements for appellate briefs by self-represented litigants
Sufficiency of arguments presented in appeal

Procedural posture

Self-represented plaintiff appealed a district court's dismissal without prejudice to the Supreme Court of Hawai'i.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER

Self-represented Plaintiff-Appellant Jason Scutt appeals from the “Order Dismissing Without Prejudice” entered by the District Court of the Second Circuit, Wailuku Division

on November 25, 2020. Scutts opening brief does not comply with Rule 28 of the Hawai‘i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP). Nevertheless, to promote access to justice the Hawai‘i Supreme Court instructs that pleadings prepared by self-represented litigants should be interpreted liberally, and self-represented litigants should not be automatically foreclosed 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). Accordingly, we address Scutts appeal on the merits. For the reasons explained below, we affirm the “Order Dismissing Without Prejudice.”

On June 29, 2020, Scutt filed a civil complaint in district court against Defendant-Appellee Maui Memorial Hospital. Rule 12 of the Hawai‘i District Court Rules of Civil Procedure provides, in relevant part:

(a) Answers — When presented; return day. All defendants shall appear or answer at the time appointed in the summons, on the second Monday following the date of service, except where the district judge sets some other secular day; and should such Monday be a legal holiday then upon the next secular day.

Attached to Scutts complaint was a summons, signed by the district court clerk. The summons stated:

TO THE DEFENDANT:

You are required to file a written answer or appear before the District Judge of this Court, in the Judges Courtroom, on the day and at the time designated by the checked box on page 2.

The boxes checked on page 2 of the summons identified the Wailuku Division as the location for the return, and the return day as “8:30 a.m. on the second Monday following date of service, and should that Monday be a legal holiday then upon the next Monday.”

Maui Memorial Hospital was served on Saturday, July 11, 2020. The return of service was filed in the district court on July 16, 2020. Scutt was electronically notified of the filing of the return of service.

The return date was Monday, July 20, 2020. The case was called. Scutt was not present. No attorney for Maui Memorial Hospital was present. The district courts minutes indicate the case was dismissed without prejudice.

Scutts notice of appeal was filed on July 21, 2020. On October 16, 2020, we temporarily remanded the case to the district court for entry of a written order as required by Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 641-1(a) (2016), pursuant to Waikiki v. Ho‘omaka Vill. Assn of Apartment Owners, 140 Hawai‘i 197, 204, 398 P.3d 786, 793 (2017). The “Order Dismissing Without Prejudice” was entered by the district court on November 25, 2020. Scutts notice of appeal is deemed to have been filed at that time. HRAP Rule 4(b)(4).

The district court had inherent power to dismiss the case for want of prosecution. See Compass Dev., Inc. v. Blevins, 10 Haw. App. 388, 393, 876 P.2d 1335, 1338 (1994); HRS § 604-7(e) (2016). Scutts opening brief presents no argument about why the district courts dismissal without prejudice was improper. The “Order Dismissing Without Prejudice” is affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

. The Honorable Kirstin Hamman presided.