Opinion ID: 2648894
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Application for a Writ of Certiorari

Text: On June 12, 2013, the Teisinas timely filed an application for a writ of certiorari to review the ICA’s “Order Dismissing Appeal for Lack of Appellate Jurisdiction”, filed on May 16, 2013 (“Dismissal Order”) and the ICA’s May 29, 2013 order denying their motion for reconsideration. We accepted the certiorari application and directed the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the applicability of the Forgay 7 Final judgment as to the Kuleana parcel was entered on August 27, 2013. 7 FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER doctrine to an order confirming a partition sale. The parties timely responded. The Teisinas argue that the Forgay doctrine is applicable to the Confirmation Order because they will suffer irreparable injury once the court-ordered transfer of Parcel 33 to Trustee Lambert is completed. Trustee Lambert argues that the Forgay doctrine is not binding on Hawai#i courts and that its application to an order confirming a partition sale would liberalize the interpretation of Hawai#i’s appellate jurisdiction statute thereby increasing the likelihood of multiple appeals from the same case. He maintains that a writ of possession has not been issued against the Teisinas and that any irreparable injury or immediate loss of property is a result of the Teisinas’ decision to include their house in the partition sale.