The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals has dismissed an appeal filed by Jasen Bodie Nielsen against his ex-wife, Jacklyn Eva Nielsen, also known as Jacklyn Eva Perales. The court's decision, issued on October 6, 2026, affects Nielsen's attempt to challenge a prior ruling from the Circuit Court of the Fifth Circuit. This dismissal highlights the importance of adhering to procedural rules in legal cases.

The court ruled that Nielsen, who represented himself in this matter, failed to file a statement of jurisdiction and an opening brief by the required deadlines. The appeal was dismissed because he did not request an extension or take any further action after being notified of the default.

Background

Jasen Bodie Nielsen and Jacklyn Eva Nielsen were involved in a legal dispute, the details of which are not fully disclosed in the court filing. The case was originally filed in the Circuit Court of the Fifth Circuit, where a ruling was made that Nielsen sought to appeal. However, specific information about the nature of the dispute or the original ruling was not provided in the opinion.

The appeal reached the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals under docket number CAAP-26-0000351. As the appellant, Jasen Bodie Nielsen was responsible for filing the necessary documentation to support his appeal. Unfortunately, he did not meet the deadlines set by the court.

The Ruling

The court's ruling was clear and straightforward. It stated, "Nielsen failed to file either document or request an extension of time." This indicates that the court found no justification for allowing the appeal to proceed due to Nielsen's inaction.

Presiding Judge Keith K. Hiraoka, along with Associate Judges Clyde J. Wadsworth and Daniel M. Gluck, signed the order dismissing the appeal. The judges noted that a default notice had been sent to Nielsen, informing him that his appeal could be dismissed if he did not comply with the filing requirements.

Impact

The dismissal of this appeal serves as a reminder of the importance of following court procedures. Self-represented litigants, like Nielsen, must be particularly diligent in meeting deadlines and understanding the requirements for their cases. Failure to do so can lead to the loss of the opportunity to appeal a decision.

This ruling does not set a new legal precedent, but it reinforces existing rules regarding the timely filing of documents in appellate cases. It emphasizes that courts expect all parties, regardless of whether they are represented by an attorney, to adhere to procedural rules.

What's Next

As the appeal has been dismissed, Jasen Bodie Nielsen may have limited options moving forward. He could potentially seek to file a new appeal if there are grounds for doing so, but details were not available in the court filing regarding any further actions he might take. It remains unclear whether there are any related cases pending in this matter.