From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mohl v. Bishop Trust Co.

Hawaii Court of Appeals
Jul 17, 1981
630 P.2d 1084 (Haw. Ct. App. 1981)

Opinion

NO. 7086

July 17, 1981

APPEAL FROM THIRD CIRCUIT COURT HONORABLE ERNEST KUBOTA, JUDGE, CIVIL NO. 3482

HAYASHI, C.J., PADGETT AND BURNS, JJ.

Thomas R. Kelso (Kelso and Battista of counsel) (Otto Mohl and Mila Mohl, plaintiffs-appellants, on the briefs) for plaintiffs-appellants.

Tom C. Leuteneker (Carlsmith, Carlsmith, Wichman and Case of counsel) for defendant-appellee Bishop Trust Co., Ltd.


Sua sponte we dismiss this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction because it is not an appeal of a final judgment as required by Hawaii Revised Statutes § 641-1 (1976, as amended).

Appellee's attorney, Tom C. Leuteneker, comprehensively discussed the dispositive issue in this case in an article in 9 HBJ 45 (1972) entitled "Interlocutory and Final Appeals in Hawaii."

Plaintiffs sued Bishop Trust Co., Ltd., Yoshinori Nakamura, Shirley A. Nakamura, Kitsu Nakamura, Lawrence P. Aguinaldo, Antonio Aguinaldo, Stella Aguinaldo, the State of Hawaii, and the County of Hawaii.

The State obtained an order of dismissal in its favor. Bishop Trust obtained a summary judgment in its favor. The County was dismissed by stipulation.

Trial as to the remaining defendants commenced on April 6, 1978. Trial was recessed at the end of the same day subject to the call of the court. On April 26, 1978, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal from the "Partial Summary Judgment" in favor of Defendant Bishop Trust. On May 4, 1978, the court scheduled the trial to continue on May 9, 1978. The record does not indicate any further action in the case other than action pertaining to plaintiffs' appeal.

This is a multiple claims and a multiple parties case. Absent certification under Rule 54(b), Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure (1954, as amended), the trial court's judgment is not appealable until all of the claims or rights and liabilities of all of the parties are completely adjudicated. Employees' Retirement v. Big Island Realty, 2 Haw. App. 151, 627 P.2d 304 (1981).

The claims or rights and liabilities of the Nakamuras and the Aguinaldos have not been completely adjudicated and Rule 54(b) certification has not been requested nor issued. Consequently, the appeal of the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Bishop Trust is premature.

The appeal is dismissed.


Summaries of

Mohl v. Bishop Trust Co.

Hawaii Court of Appeals
Jul 17, 1981
630 P.2d 1084 (Haw. Ct. App. 1981)
Case details for

Mohl v. Bishop Trust Co.

Case Details

Full title:OTTO MOHL and MILA MOHL, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BISHOP TRUST CO., LTD.…

Court:Hawaii Court of Appeals

Date published: Jul 17, 1981

Citations

630 P.2d 1084 (Haw. Ct. App. 1981)
630 P.2d 1084

Citing Cases

Hawaii Court of Appeals

Lui v. City County, 63 Haw. 668, 634 P.2d 595 (1981).Mohl v. Bishop Trust Co., Ltd., 2 Haw. App. 296, 630…

Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Co. v. Manalo

There is no showing of compliance with HRCP, Rule 54(b) and the matter appealed from is not a final judgment…