Muller v. Betsill Brother LLC — Hawaiʻi appeals court dismisses appeal by stipulation

Case
Meredith Muller v. Betsill Brother LLC
Court
Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
Judge
Karen T. Nakasone (David Y. Ige, 2020); Katherine G. Leonard (Linda Lingle, 2008)
Date Decided
July 30, 2026
Docket No.
CAAP-26-0000319
Topics
Appellate procedure, Stipulated dismissal, Costs
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Meredith Muller, appearing without counsel, appealed from a case in the District Court of the Second Circuit, Wailuku Division. Betsill Brother LLC was the appellee.

On July 24, 2026, Muller and Betsill Brother filed a “Stipulation for Dismissal of Appeal Pursuant to HRAP Rule 42(b).” The Intermediate Court of Appeals construed the stipulation as a motion to dismiss the appeal.

The Court’s Holding

The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals granted the parties’ motion and dismissed the appeal.

The court ordered that each party bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. The order did not address the merits of the underlying dispute.

Key Takeaways

  • A jointly submitted stipulation under Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 42(b) can support dismissal of an appeal.
  • The dismissal ended the appeal without a merits ruling.
  • Each party was responsible for its own attorneys’ fees and costs.

Why It Matters

The order illustrates the routine use of stipulated dismissal to terminate an appellate proceeding when the parties agree not to pursue it. Because the court did not reach the merits, the order provides no substantive appellate ruling on the dispute below.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top