From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kyo-Ya Co. v. James Hardie Building Prod.

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Mar 27, 2003
25533 (Haw. Mar. 27, 2003)

Opinion

25533

March 27, 2003.

APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT (CIV. NO. 01-1-0865)

MOON, C.J., LEVINSON, NAKAYAMA, and ACOBA, JJ. and CIRCUIT JUDGE SIMMS, ASSIGNED BY REASON OF VACANCY


ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Upon review of the record, it appears the Honorable Richard W. Pollack's November 12, 2002 discovery order requiring the disclosure of, among other things, Defendants-Appellants James Hardie Building Products, Inc., and James Hardie Industries (USA), Inc.'s (the James Hardie Appellants), trade secrets in Civil No. 02-1-0865-03 (RWP), is neither an appealable final order under HRS § 641-1(a) (1993) nor a certified interlocutory order under HRS § 641-1(b) (1993). The November 12, 2002 discovery order does not qualify as an appealable order under the Forgay doctrine or the collateral order doctrine. See Ciesla v. Reddish, 78 Haw. 18, 20, 889 P.2d 702, 704 (1995) (regarding the Forgay doctrine); Abrams v. Cades, Schutte, Fleming Wright, 88 Haw. 319, 321-22, 966 P.2d 631, 633-34 (1998) (regarding the collateral order doctrine). Final judgment having not been entered, the November 12, 2002 discovery order is not appealable, and this appeal is premature. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this appeal is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.


Summaries of

Kyo-Ya Co. v. James Hardie Building Prod.

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Mar 27, 2003
25533 (Haw. Mar. 27, 2003)
Case details for

Kyo-Ya Co. v. James Hardie Building Prod.

Case Details

Full title:KYO-YA COMPANY, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellee v. JAMES HARDIE BUILDING…

Court:Supreme Court of Hawaii

Date published: Mar 27, 2003

Citations

25533 (Haw. Mar. 27, 2003)