The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals has dismissed an appeal filed by John William Jacob Jr. against Patrick Worley. This decision, made on June 19, 2026, affects Jacob, who sought to withdraw his appeal without any opposition from other parties. The ruling underscores the importance of procedural compliance in the appellate process.

The case, identified by docket number CAAP-26-0000317, was initiated in the District Court of the First Circuit, Ewa Division. The dismissal of the appeal means that the lower court's decision stands without further review. This outcome is significant for both parties involved, as it closes the chapter on this particular legal dispute.

Background

Patrick Worley and John William Jacob Jr. are the primary parties in this case. The details surrounding the initial dispute leading to Jacob's appeal are not specified in the court filing. However, it is clear that Jacob was representing himself in the appeal process, which can often complicate legal proceedings.

The case reached the Intermediate Court of Appeals after Jacob filed a notice of appeal against a decision made by the District Court of the First Circuit. The specific nature of the original case, including the claims and defenses presented, was not detailed in the court's opinion. This lack of information leaves some questions about the underlying issues that prompted Jacob to appeal.

On May 1, 2026, Jacob submitted a motion to dismiss his own appeal. The court reviewed this motion along with the supporting documents and found no opposition from any other parties involved. This lack of opposition likely contributed to the court's decision to grant the motion swiftly.

The Ruling

The court ruled to grant Jacob's motion to dismiss the appeal, stating, "the appeal has been docketed; Jacob seeks to dismiss his own appeal; no other parties have appeared in the appeal; and dismissal is authorized by Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 42(b)." This ruling was issued by Chief Judge Karen T. Nakasone, along with Associate Judges Clyde J. Wadsworth and Daniel M. Gluck.

The court's decision to dismiss the appeal means that the previous ruling from the District Court remains in effect. Additionally, the court ordered that each party shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs on appeal. This aspect of the ruling indicates that neither party will recover costs related to the appeal process.

Impact

The dismissal of this appeal has implications for both parties involved. For Jacob, it signifies the end of his legal efforts to contest the lower court's decision. Without further details on the original case, it is difficult to assess the full impact of this ruling on his situation.

This case also highlights the procedural rules governing appeals in Hawaii. The court's reliance on Rule 42(b) of the Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure emphasizes the importance of following established legal protocols when pursuing an appeal. The ruling serves as a reminder to individuals representing themselves in court that they must adhere to these rules to avoid dismissal.

What's Next

With the appeal dismissed, it is unclear if Jacob plans to take any further legal action. The court filing did not indicate whether there are any related cases pending or if Jacob intends to pursue other avenues for relief. As it stands, the dismissal effectively concludes this matter in the appellate court.