# Profoundd archive — Epstein Files # Bates number: EFTA01246450 # Title: IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS # Dataset: 9 # Pages: 14 # Images: 14 detected # Tags: epstein, doj, dataset-9, image-described # Source PDF: https://profoundd.com/epstein-docs/EFTA01246450/download # Doc viewer: https://profoundd.com/epstein-docs/EFTA01246450 # # Text below is what Profoundd has extracted from the source PDF. # 'ocr-enriched' tag means OCR was applied to scan-only pages. # Image descriptions are AI-generated factual captions (llava:13b). #---------------------------------------------------------------------- === SUMMARY === NO. 23838 IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS Oi TUB STATE OF HAWAII ROBERT COELLO and SARAN KELLEN, Petitioners -Appellees, v. TOM DONNAN, Respondent -Appellant APPEAL FROM IH8 DISTRICT COURT OF TUE FIRST CIRCjit, HONOIULO DIVISION • (CIVIL NO. 1DSS 0C-1035) MEMORANDOM OPINION (Sy: Watanabe, Acting C.J., Lim and Foley, JJ.) Respondent -Appellant Tom Dorman (Dorman) appeals from an Order Granting petition for injunction Against Harassment (the Injunction.)' granted to Petitioners -•Appellees Ro === EXTRACTED TEXT === NO. 23838 IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS Oi TUB STATE OF HAWAII ROBERT COELLO and SARAN KELLEN, Petitioners -Appellees, v. TOM DONNAN, Respondent -Appellant APPEAL FROM IH8 DISTRICT COURT OF TUE FIRST CIRCjit, HONOIULO DIVISION • (CIVIL NO. 1DSS 0C-1035) MEMORANDOM OPINION (Sy: Watanabe, Acting C.J., Lim and Foley, JJ.) Respondent -Appellant Tom Dorman (Dorman) appeals from an Order Granting petition for injunction Against Harassment (the Injunction.)' granted to Petitioners -•Appellees Robert Coello i/Tb. Injueetion wan granted pursuant to Kawaii Revised Statutas 5 604-10.i rsupp. 20011, which provides, in relevant part: gSDAI-10.5 fovea to enjoin sod tcaporiariiy restrain hasaeseriat. (a) :or :ho purposes of this soctroN: •Courso of conduc•-• rears a pattern ct conduct composed of a stiles of arta oser any period of tine evidencing a continuity of porpnan. "Norusimeot" means: . . 12) An intonticoel er kneeing cootie et condact Cis-acted at an individual that seriously alai"e or nistarba consistently or ccocalual:y bath.rn Fla indlrldudi, nod that serene an legitimate pi-gooney provided LDat such encase et conchnt would etre. A realnnable parson to suffer anatinnal di SDI Ike MinLriel coots &hal: have power to ehjntn or prohibit or tempo-arily restrain harassment. (el Any person who ads beau sab)ocita to Assaf:anent nay peritien the distxlt.L coati ut Ltla d:strict In utica tie pa:tritest resides for a temporary restraining ardex and an injunction trod farther Ea:amens. (a) A petition tor relief from h r r rrr inept shall. be in writing and sh►ll allege that a pas: set ox act, of kasaismenx may have occurred. or that throats of harassment make it probable that (contioned...i Z d « £596559195 XV4 Z£:11 9I-80-LOOZ CONFIDENTIAL KELLEN-000003 3501.125-001 Page I of 14 EFIA_00064879 EFTA01246450 (Coello) and Sara, Kellen (Kellen) by the DlstrleL Court or the First Circuit, Honolulu Divl$:.on ) (tbe district court), on . September 2O, 2O00. On appeal, Donnas contends that: (1) because the matter arises from a real estate dispute, the district court lacks jurisdiction; (2) the Injunction unlawfully prohibits constitutionally prt.e.cted activity; (31 the district court erred when it denied Donnan's Objections to Video Document and Objections. Lo Declaration of Petitioners; and (4) the district Vf...corttnUed) acts ut haraenment may be itenloont; sae ;bull be ercreman'ed by en aftidevIt fled( under oath Dr aka-mmtnt mid* uncles penally el perjury stating the specific , fac:s sod etrcunatences from en'.cd relief is sosght. (el open petllion to a district ccurt under this section. the court nay temporarily restrain the person or peteens trance In the petition from harassing the petitioner upoa a determination that there 33 probable cause tc believe that a paac act or acts Ise harasomect have eccurree or that a threat or threat, of haraaenent ray be InnInent. The court say issue IX 0% parrs temporary rear.-alning Groot *Whet in ertting cr orally; p!ovidod :Eat ora: eiders shell he reduced to vritlos by the cause of the next court day follselos oral issuance. (t) A temporary restraining order that 'et granted under this umutton 00'1 ?eerie in *flee; at the discretion at the cacti: oar a period not to exceed ninety days frox tho date the order :a granted. A hcarLag on _he petition to ebjcln Terminer shall be neld within fifteen days after tae temporary rostra thing order it grantee. Tn the event :hat service o; the teeporary rentreining order hue ant beer eflecled btfole the date oC ;he heuring an llmi petition Lt anjait, tan court may set a rev date for the bearing: provided that ;be new daze /shell sot exceed 'ninety days from rho data the tempority rcbtrainIng Order secs granted. The car:nes raned it the potl:ion nay ;Ito or give CCU/ tCLIMAGgis •xpininine, excusing : iunnifyirq, cr denying the oilseed net. as ;Mtn SI harassment. The court ehtI. 4v3ViVil al; evidence Oat is relevant f.-; Lhc hearing, and any make indepetdent inouiry. (i) Nothing in this sco:ios shall he constrned to prchicit conemitetionally protected activity. Hcnorable Barbara Y. niche:313os presided. 2 £ d << £596559195 xVJ ££:ll 9L-90-LOOZ CONFIDENTIAL KELLEN-000004 3501.125-001 Page 2 of 14 EFTA_00064880 EFTA01246451 court denicd Donnen due procesis of lar and egual protectiot of the .lag in vlolatiOn ot the Courteenta amendaert of the :bile(' States Constitution and artiole I, section SI of the Hawaii. Constitution. /. BACKGROOND Coello and Kellen filed an Antended Petition fer Ra Patte TemPotacP Res‘rainLng Order and ter Injtnetion Against Haransw.nt (the. Petition) in the die hiet. court on August 24, 2000. On the Petition, Coello and Kel±.en wrote the followitg decaratlon detailing tue alleged harassment: Sines kek,Lng gennegALw di tue udiae hOrdoritg Ni. Dunrun es bonav, ge kage bad motstue trott gegegel oil) and county dopar:notat reeponding to reoplainan tron P.r. ;Doggen] 6 . Se, leid] Etno» SuateLy, tulldieg inepecsoce, firt dePortatnt, SePt. sp= band Okilikatken, Soger Deffie., eke., vite note [India; any fant er ~tg action, After toting onnorship, ve Rad to avlot Deanen'', (eiend, nellieon duo co non-paynent et rena fer S aon:te. Artes vanting ake toen Jet* Ot Aaq. ll", bonnen a all hit ariene!» 6 tenesta on bli yard, sterten sniking valget. rattet i threiterne vommete tauende Sarah att sebert, -"len ve zliterde4 om vidt*. They seid **trys ot_y Sitat behUn karage:ao us. Ang ve kave:ile segn govi:kå:tg yot. After seivoyina tue propercy ISnw, ve poeten sa* tnespesslas' alene On Degneg's Rico gt uer P:ODere.Y. Ttig goter tann very nrch alten tray hut: the ILlatiOn part Of on, praperty belg:mnd kg teen. /hes! :ore otf eke signe t the« thea lp oez yard. usuil)y the onn et, matlette the ..u2W:ote it OgobAt's :nedlate 'Tiend & crlyamicn. Percy. We !ror to: the tafety pi Rarah, e younq roeure oho Corran i Si. Staut. Drite. per. ). S 3 (IWY3). p£0.:64,: DUE PROCESS AND EQU&L PROTECTION Seation S. go Fessen ',bold bo deprived or tite, libercy or pr:perty deo protest cf net ot denlad eke egge! pretection ed the kave, nor be ~tien the eapleyzon: of tre persen's civil right', or ba dlacriminoted against in the oxerclse thereof betona et roet, religion, Sex or anceetry. 3 t d « £596559195 )(Yd ££:11 91-90-L002 CONFIDENTIAL KELLEN-000005 3501.125-001 Page 3 of 14 EFTA_00064881 EFTA01246452 'Wood* try "any dolled bar •Bitch" and alai* mode numeroue racial %aura :eying a* oat liker. U6, had to oo back across tbo corder. in addition to all thin, ovuzy Liao 44.1 yQUVU bouv0 to go to the beech, snide 4 en aaaa al (sic) comments are mode by connun a tr1Oada toward Powart, Sarah 4 their dogs. On August 24, 2000, a temporary restrainirg order was entered by the district court against Donnan and Donnan was notified that a hearing on the petition would be held on September. 6, 2000, at 8:30 a.m. Or. September 1, 2000, Donnan filed s Motion for Order Declaring Temporary Restraining Order Null and Void, Dissolving Same and to Pismias Petition and for Reasonable Attorney's Fees and Costs (Molion DeelarIng SRO Null and Void).. Donnan's motion Slated Lhal the Petition was frivolous, the district court lacked jurisdiction over a real property dispute, and the :restraining order denied him his protected constitutional rights. Dennan's motion came for hearing ca September 6, 2000, and was denied.' A hearing on the Petition was he:od September 20, 2000, at which the following evidence was adduced. Coello testified that he had purchased a duplex next door to Donnan's property. In order to setLle n property line dispute witn Donnan, Coello paid for an official survey of his property to satisfy Doman. 'Cool)* found our that he had more IlIbe 'Constable AbOndo A. tilsbiadEa resided. 4 5 d « £596559195 XVJ ££%11 54.-90-200Z CONFIDENTIAL KELLEN-000006 3501.125-001 Page 4 of 14 EFFA_00064882 EFTA01246453 yard than he originally thought he owned. During June and Jay of 2000, Cooke was visited by the police department, a building inspector, the Sunset Beach Fire Department, an inspector from the Department of Land Otiiization, and the health department. The visits were made in response to telephone calls from Donnan's residence. No violations were found by any of these entities. There were approximately 12 people residing on remnants property, On Juno 19, 2000, Coello was given access to cienn out tne possessions of Malou Hallison (Mallison), who had been evicted in April from the adjoining half of Coello's duplex. Coen* had been awarded $803 from Hallison for payment of hack rent after.a summary possess;on hearing VD August 15, 2000. Helli=on was a friend of Donnan. Three hours after the August 16, 2300, hearing, Coello videotaped Donnan and his guests arguing with Kellen across the property line. Men of the speech on L'ne videotape was transcribed as indiscernible. Donnar objected to the admission of the videotape en the basic that the tape was edited and was an invasion of Donnan's privacy. The district court overruled the objection, and allowed one minute of the videotape to he played, stating: The p¢rtions that are offing ahcwo to the Court are wediest, o- nnspliced and clam the taints perccn van one of the pelLtionero, urn the petitioner our toting the video froth the petitioner's own property, end the subject of the video was part Hr. Hannan. 5 9 d « £596559L95 XVJ ££VLL 9L-80-L002 CONFIDENTIAL KELLEN-000007 3501.1254)01 Page 5 of 14 EFTA_Ce064883 EFTA01246454 110) court finds Cis: tha avLaanur will be ada4ttsd a. wag agigagat, ant the Cant aattrulau the ofjossier. After viewing the videotape, Dorman again objected on the ground that there was no harassment shown by Donnan on the videotape. The district court did not find the videotape was that instructive with respect to any acts of harassment and allowed !tithes testimony,. Coello testified that when ho ana Kellen warAed out to the beach, Dunne° and his guests would yell volgaritien sad raoial slurs at and make obscene gestures towards Coeilo and 'Kellen. Coello believed the enimosiT.y stemmed from an official survey that added to Coello's property end the eviction of Donnan's friend from Coello's property. Kellen testified that Donnan had verbally harassed her by yelling racial slurs at her and had threatened future harassment. Donnan called Samson cantos (Santos), an investigator for lne Hawaiian Humane Society, as the only defense witness. Santos testified that two complaints had teen made against Coen:, for violations of the leash Law. Only one of tlw complaints had been made by Donnan.. Santos visited Coello throe times and round no violations, so the case had been closed. 6 OIL d « £596559195 XVJ ££:ll 9L-90-LOOe CONFIDENTIAL KELLEN-000008 3501.125-001 Page 6 of 14 EFTA_00064884 EFTA01246455 At the close ot evidence, Donnan moved to dismiss the complaint on the basis of inaufriciert evidence and lack CI jurisdiction over a real property dispute. The district court denied Donnan's motion and granted the Injunction for a period of three years. The district court stated; VOX COURT: elelybe, clue Court does f%nel by client aid aunrinula ,2 OuSte,Ce that the an/pendent, Nr. canal, han Sirenitenally ur knowingly ecoductem klartelt taunter, the patItIonert lo J nannAr whisk SOz1COsly niacin or dierw-ht Thom by conskezett_y ot contInuslly tentie‘Ing the SedivldLute with ennpitiata the building innvOttore, fix« deparzwert, .and utl:liestten, watt sewage owpartaft“u, et cetera. Accoby atIrb lo omving nn iftlitinato porpcse otter than co Onknew the petitioners, and -hiet Is caused lLo OCSitStriere re sutt,,: egOilenel matrek, end reinnzab:y 4O. therefore, tee COOrt is gninq to grant the nciat Of tejunction ve:oliloo N-. Dona« .:er a period ut th:e2 yntra tromp :ortber tarnenment el tie pets".'. . . . . And yin) scaptc: to yens mutioa if It is as [Cell's., Counsel), tc a:taxi:2 CD tSe hanta that this is real property dispctt. the Court finds them the motion is going he denied. thie le & matte: 0! taeaserseat which the district cunt bee the pawia CO enloic aid wnich the Court is gclug to enjo'.1 at title tine. With respect tc any property disputant tbst does belong In eircul: court aid the Cne:t Ls nos by this ardor preventive the respondent Iran :Slime a legitinote action with sh,pn h£4l 91.-00-LOOZ CONFIDENTIAL KELLEN-000016 3501.125-001 Page 14 of 14 EFIA_00064892 EFTA01246463 === IMAGE DESCRIPTIONS === [Image 1] The image shows a document with text, which appears to be a letter or a report. The document is titled "OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY" and includes a date and a reference number. The text discusses legal matters and references specific cases or individuals. The document is marked "CONFIDENTIAL" at the top, indicating that the information it contains is sensitive and not intended for public discl [Image 2] The image shows a document that appears to be a court order or a legal document. It includes text and a signature at the bottom. The document is titled "ORDER OF THE COURT" and mentions a "PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS." There are paragraphs of text detailing the legal proceedings and a section titled "WHEREFORE," followed by a conclusion. The document is dated and signed by a judge or court [Image 3] The image shows a document with text, which appears to be a letter or a report. The document is titled "REPORT OF INVESTIGATION" and includes a date and a reference number at the top. The text is divided into sections with headings such as "Background," "Findings," and "Recommendations." There are also numbered paragraphs within each section. The document contains text that is too small to read in [Image 4] The image shows a document with text, which appears to be a letter or a report. The document is titled "OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR," and it mentions a case number and a date. The text discusses the results of a forensic examination and refers to a specific individual. The document is marked "CONFIDENTIAL" at the bottom. There are no visible names, dates, places, or logos that can be describe [Image 5] The image shows a document with text, which appears to be a page from a confidential report or a similar type of document. The text is too small to read clearly, and the document is marked "CONFIDENTIAL" at the top. The visible text includes a header, a list of bullet points, and a footer. The document is numbered "2" and has a date at the bottom, but the specific details are not legible due to th [Image 6] The image shows a document that appears to be a letter or a report, with visible text and a header that includes the date and the names of the sender and recipient. The document is marked "CONFIDENTIAL" at the top, indicating that the contents are meant to be kept secret. The visible text includes a title, an introduction, a list of points or findings, and a conclusion. The document is dated, and