Case Title: In re Cunha

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2005-12-23T00:00:00Z

Document:
*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION ***
no, 27218
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'T

 

In the Matter of the Trust Created Under the Will Dated
November 15, 1917 of EMANUEL S. CUNHA, Deceased

 

CARMA R. MENG, DONNA PATRICIA MURRAY, and HARVE D. MURRAY,
Petitioners-Appelants/Cross~Appellees

 

HAWAIIAN TRUST COMPANY, LTD.,
Respondent-Appellee/Cross~Appellant

 

    

APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT &
(TRUST NO. 97-0116) S

AMENDED ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

(By: Nakayama, J., for the court!)

Upon review of the record, it appears that jurisdiction
over Count I was transferred from the circuit court to the
appellate court on August 20, 2000 upon the filing of the
interlocutory appeal of the order denying summary judgment on
Count I. The interlocutory appeal was disposed by opinion filed
on April 23, 2004, after which the circuit court entered judgment
on Counts II, III and IV on February 7, 2005. The February 7,
2005 judgment purported to enter judgment on Count I, but the
circuit court lacked jurisdiction to resolve Count I inasmuch as
appellate jurisdiction over Count I did not terminate until the
judgment on appeal was filed and the judgment on appeal was not
filed until April 21, 2005 after it was submitted by the parties
for filing on April 11, 2005. See State v. Ortiz, 91 Hawai'i
181, 197, 981 P.2d 1127, 1143 (1999) (“Appellate jurisdiction in
Hawai" does not terminate until the appellate court files its

Moon, C.J.) Levinson, Nakayama, Accba, and Duffy, 39.

 
*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION ***

judgment on appeal,” citing McCarthy v. Jaress, 6 Haw. App. 143,
146, 711 P.2d 1315, 1318 (1985).). ‘The circuit court's lack of
jurisdiction cannot be waived by the parties or disregarded by
the court. McCarthy, 6 Haw. App. at 146, 711 P.2d at 1318.
Consequently, the February 7, 2005 judgment is null and void as
to the entzy of judgment on Count I and the entry of judgment on
, TIL and IV is not appealable. See HRS § 641-1(a);
Hawail Probate Rules 20(f) and 34. Thus, this appeal is
premature and we lack jurisdiction. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal by appellants
carma Meng, Donna Murray and Herve Murray and the cross-appeal by
Bank of Hawai are dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, December 23, 2005.

FOR THE COURT:

counts

 

Naas o% {°
WON teary Oigr|
Resociate Justice