NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-20-0000036

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

JAMES JONATHON DRISCOLL aka JAMES JONATHAN DRISCOLL;

GEORGE M. KAIMIOLA; and ZILPAH K. KAIMIOLA,

Plaintiffs-Appellees, ALLEN B. ARAKAWA; and DEBBIE

E. ARAKAWA, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BANK OF

AMERICA, N.A.; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION

SYSTEMS, INC., GEORGE MATIC; MILENA MATIC;

ALEKSANDRA O. MATIC; STEVEN MATIC; SIMON T. NGAN;

JILL S.A. NGAN; AMERICAN SAVINGS BANK, F.S.B.;

JASON C. BALBERDI; NAHINU R. FREITAS; THE FEDERAL

SAVINGS BANK, Defendants-Appellees, and DOE

DEFENDANTS 1-50, Defendants

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT

(CASE NO. 2CC191000167(1))

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL FOR LACK OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION

(By: Ginoza, Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Wadsworth, JJ.)

Upon review of the record, it appears that we lack

appellate jurisdiciton over Plaintiffs-Appellees Allen B. Arakawa

and Debbie E. Arakawa's (the Arakawas) appeal from the Honorable

Rhonda I.L. Loo's January 8, 2020 interlocutory order granting

Defendant/Cross-Claim Defendant/Appellee Bank of America, N.A.

(Bank of America) and Defendant-Appellee Mortgage Electronic

Registration Systems, Inc.'s motion to partially dismiss the

Arakawas and Plaintiffs-Appellees James Jonathon Driscoll

(Driscoll), George M. Kaimiola and Zilpah K. Kaimiola's (the

Kaimiolas) first amended complaint and sever their claims,

because the circuit court has neither resolved all of the

Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-20-0000036

04-MAY-2020

09:53 AM
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

multiple claims in this case nor reduced its dispositive rulings

to an appealable final judgment.

An aggrieved party cannot obtain appellate review of a

circuit court's dispositive orders in a civil case pursuant to

Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 641-1(a)(2016) until the circuit

court reduces the dispositive rulings to an appealable final

judgment pursuant to Rules 58 or 54(b) of the Hawai#i Rules of

Civil Procedure (HRCP). See Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming &

Wright, 76 Hawai#i 115, 119, 869 P.2d 1334, 1338 (1994). All of

the parties apparently agree that the circuit court has not yet

adjudicated and entered a judgment on all of the multiple claims

asserted in: 

• the Kaimiolas, Driscoll, and the Arakawas'

June 17, 2019 first amended complaint, 

• Defendant/Cross-Claim Plaintiff/Appellee Jason C.

Balberdi Balberdi's September 30, 2019 crossclaim, 

• Defendants/Cross-Claim Plaintiffs/Appellees

Simon T. Ngan and Jill S.A. Ngan's September 30,

2019 cross-claim, 

• Defendant/Cross-Claim Plaintiff/Appellee American

Savings Bank, F.S.B.'s October 2, 2019 crossclaim, 

• Defendants/Cross-Claim Plaintiffs/Third-Party

Plaintiffs/Appellees George Matic, Milena Matic,

Aleksandra O. Matic, and Steven Matic's (the

Matics) October 25, 2019 cross-claim, and 

• the Matics' October 25, 2019 third-party

complaint.

Nevertheless, the Arakawas assert in their February 20, 2020

statement of jurisdiction that, to the limited extent that the

January 8, 2020 interlocutory order severs the Arakawas' claims

pursuant to HRCP Rule 21, the January 8, 2020 interlocutory order

is immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine and

the Forgay doctrine. However, our review of the record and

relevant case law reveals that the January 8, 2020 interlocutory

2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

order does not satisfy the multiple requirements for

appealability under the collateral order doctrine or the Forgay

doctrine. See Greer v. Baker, 137 Hawai#i 249, 253, 369 P.3d

832, 836 (2016) (reciting the requirements for appeals under the

collateral order doctrine and the Forgay doctrine); Hofmann v.

De Marchena Kaluche & Asociados, 642 F.3d 995, 998 (11th Cir.

2011) (holding that the collateral order doctrine does not

provide appellate jurisdiction for a severance order issued under

Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); cf. In re Lieb,

915 F.2d 180, 182–185 (5th Cir. 1990) (holding that a district

court's order severing claims and directing that they continue as

separate actions in bankruptcy court was not an appealable final

order). Absent an appealable final judgment, we lack appellate

jurisdiction.

 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that appellate court case

number CAAP-20-0000036 is dismissed for lack of appellate

jurisdiction.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, May 4, 2020.

/s/ Lisa M. Ginoza

Chief Judge

/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka

Associate Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth

Associate Judge

3