Opinion ID: 2632547
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Whether PBS May Appeal the Denial of its Motion to Vacate the Award

Text: HRS § 658-15 (1993) provides: Unless the agreement for award provides that no appeal may be taken[,] an appeal may be taken from an order vacating an award, or from a judgment entered upon an award, as from an order or judgment in an action, otherwise no appeal may be had. Schmidt contends that HRS § 658-15 precludes an appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate an arbitration award because it only allows for appeals from (1) an order vacating an award or (2) a judgment upon the award, i.e., a confirmation. PBS counters that the intent of HRS § 658-15 is to avoid piecemeal appeals and that the [c]ircuit [c]ourt's decision to deny vacating the [A]ward was an integral step in the process leading to the confirmation of the Award. PBS further posits that, once there is a final order confirming the Award, the correctness of the underlying order denying the motion to vacate may be addressed on appeal according to the very case cited by Schmidt for the opposite contention. We agree with PBS. `The right of appeal is purely statutory and exists only when given by some [c]onstitutional or statutory provision.' Salud v. Fin. Sec. Ins. Co., 69 Haw. 427, 429, 745 P.2d 290, 292 (1987) (quoting Chambers v. Leavey, 60 Haw. 52, 57, 587 P.2d 807, 810 (1978)). Under HRS § 641-1(a) (1993), appeals [shall be] allowed in civil matters from all final judgments, orders, or decrees of circuit . . . courts . . . to the supreme court or to the intermediate appellate court, except as otherwise provided by law[.] As previously stated, HRS § 658-8 permits any party to an arbitration [a]t any time within one year after the award is made and served, . . . [to] apply to the circuit court . . . for an order confirming the award. Thereupon[,] the court shall grant such an order, unless the award is vacated, modified, or corrected, as prescribed in sections 658-9[ [6] ] and 658-10[ [7] ]. A party seeking to vacate, modify, or correct an award must serve notice upon the adverse party or the party's attorney within ten days after the award is made and served. HRS § 658-11 (1993). In Salud, this court was presented with the question whether an appeal may be taken from an order denying a motion to vacate an award. In ruling that there was no such right, this court stated that: When an order confirming, modifying, or correcting an award is granted, the relevant statute directs that the same shall be filed in the office of the clerk of the circuit court and this shall constitute the entry of judgment. HRS § 658-12. And an appeal may be taken from such judgment as set forth thereafter in chapter 658. Id. But nothing set forth thereafter allows an appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate an award; HRS § 658-15 proclaims instead in unmistakable terms that an appeal may be taken from an order vacating an award, or from a judgment entered upon an award, otherwise no appeal may be had. Still, this does not mean that the denial of a motion to vacate an award by the circuit court necessarily forecloses an appeal sanctioned by HRS § 658-15. The unsuccessful movant's recourse would then be a motion to confirm the award. Since the circuit court has already reviewed the award and decided no grounds exist for vacating it, a confirmation should follow. The movant could then perfect an appeal and obtain appellate review of the order confirming the award. The foregoing procedure would also make it possible for someone whose motion for modification or correction of an arbitrator's award has been denied to seek appellate review of the circuit court's ruling. And where confirmation of the award is sought to facilitate an appeal in either situation, the movant would not, of course, be estopped from urging the vacation, modification, or correction of the award on appeal. Id. at 430-31, 745 P.2d at 292-93 (brackets, footnotes, and ellipses points omitted) (emphases in original). [8] Further, in Oppenheimer v. AIG Hawai`i Insurance Co., 77 Hawai`i 88, 881 P.2d 1234 (1994), this court discussed the holding in Salud, stating that: Because the statutory provisions governing judicial review of arbitration awards precluded an appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate an arbitration award, we held in Salud that this court lacked jurisdiction. However, implicit in our ruling in Salud is that, by virtue of HRS § 658-12, an order confirming an arbitration award is a final judgment from which an appeal may be taken. Salud, 69 Haw. at 431, 745 P.2d at 293. Id. at 91, 881 P.2d at 1237 (footnote omitted) (emphasis added). Thus, an order denying a motion to vacate an arbitration award is not a final judgment that may be directly appealed. Here, the award was confirmed in the same order that denied PBS's motion to vacate. As such, there is no issue of finality here. However, inasmuch as HRS § 658-15 directs that the circuit court shall confirm an order that is not vacated prior to confirmation, we now examine the circumstances under which a party may urge vacation of an award at confirmation and on appeal.