From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cnty. of Maui v. Castro

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
May 31, 2017
NO. CAAP-16-0000857 (Haw. Ct. App. May. 31, 2017)

Opinion

NO. CAAP-16-0000857

05-31-2017

COUNTY OF MAUI, Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant/Appellee, v. RICHARD ALLEN CASTRO, LIANN CASTRO, AND CHRISSIE H. CASTRO, Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaintiffs/Cross-Claim Defendants/Appellants and ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF KIHEI VILLAGES, Defendant/Cross-Claim Plaintiff/Appellee and ARGENT MORTGAGE COMPANY, LLC, PRINCETON RECONVEYANCE SERVICE, BENEFICIAL HAWAII, INC., HAWAI'I DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION, STATE OF HAWAI'I, Defendants/Cross-Claim Defendants/Appellees and JOHN DOES 1-20 and DOE ENTITIES 1-20, Defendants.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI'I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT
(CIVIL NO. 15-1-0650(1)) ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL FOR LACK OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION
(By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, Reifurth and Ginoza, JJ.)

Upon review of Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaintiffs/Cross-Claim Defendants/Appellants Richard Allen Castro, Liann Castro and Chrissie H. Castro's (the Castro Appellants) appeal from the Honorable Rhonda I.L. Loo's November 14, 2016 judgment, it appears that we lack appellate jurisdiction because the circuit court's November 14, 2016 judgment does not comply with Id. at 119-20 n.4, 869 P.2d at 1338-39 n.4 (emphasis added). When interpreting the requirements for an appealable final judgment under HRS § 641-1(a) and HRCP Rule 58, the Supreme Court of Hawai'i has explained that

[i]f we do not require a judgment that resolves on its face all of the issues in the case, the burden of searching the often voluminous circuit court record to verify assertions of jurisdiction is cast upon this court. Neither the parties nor counsel have a right to cast upon this court the burden of searching a voluminous record for evidence of finality, . . . and we should not make such searches necessary by allowing the parties the option of waiving the requirements of HRCP [Rule] 58.
Jenkins, 76 Hawai'i at 119, 869 P.2d at 1338 (citation omitted; original emphasis).

Although the instant case involves multiple claims as a result of Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant/Appellee County of Maui's complaint, the Castro Appellants' counterclaim, and Defendant/Cross-Claim Plaintiff/Appellee Association of Apartment Owners of Kihei Villages' (Appellee AOAO Kihei Villages) multiple cross-claims, the November 14, 2016 judgment does not identify the claim or claims on which the circuit court intends to enter judgment when it enters judgment in favor of Appellee AOAO Kihei Villages and against the Castro Appellants and Defendants/Cross-Claim Defendants/Appellees Argent Mortgage Company, LLC, Princeton Reconveyance Service, and Beneficial Hawaii, Inc. In the absence of any identification of the claim or claims on which the circuit court intends to enter judgment, the November 14, 2016 judgment fails to satisfy the requirements for an appealable final judgment under HRS 641-1(a), HRCP Rule 58, and the holding in Jenkins, and thus, the November 14, 2016 judgment is not eligible for appellate review. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that appellate court case number CAAP-16-0000857 is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, May 31, 2017.

/s/

Presiding Judge

/s/

Associate Judge

/s/

Associate Judge


Summaries of

Cnty. of Maui v. Castro

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
May 31, 2017
NO. CAAP-16-0000857 (Haw. Ct. App. May. 31, 2017)
Case details for

Cnty. of Maui v. Castro

Case Details

Full title:COUNTY OF MAUI, Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant/Appellee, v. RICHARD…

Court:INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

Date published: May 31, 2017

Citations

NO. CAAP-16-0000857 (Haw. Ct. App. May. 31, 2017)