Court Opinion

ID: 9397642
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-25 19:11:06.793996+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:26.474169
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

                                                     Electronically Filed
                                                     Intermediate Court of Appeals
                                                     CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
                                                     25-MAY-2023
                                                     08:13 AM
                                                     Dkt. 20 ODSLJ
                            NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

                  IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

                          OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

              DOUGLAS HIRANO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
    KATE McCLORY; SAND ISLAND TREATMENT CENTER; AT&T WIRELESS;
         RANDY COOK; HOLIDAY INN HOTEL; WHITE SANDS HOTEL;
   SAND VILLA HOTEL; COCONUT WAIKIKI HOTEL; OHANA MALIA HOTEL,
                     Defendants-Appellees, and
      JOHN DOES 1-200; JANE ROES 1-100, Defendants-Appellees

          APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                      (CIVIL NO. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)

   ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL FOR LACK OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION
       (By: Ginoza, Chief Judge, Nakasone and Chan, JJ.)
             Upon review of the record, it appears that self-
represented Plaintiff-Appellant Douglas Hirano appeals from the
Circuit Court of the First Circuit's (circuit court) May 18, 2022
"Order Granting Defendant AT&T Mobility LLC's (erroneously
identified as AT&T Wireless) Motion for Summary Judgment as to
all Claims" (5/18/22 Order).
             The court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal because
the circuit court has not entered a final, appealable order or
judgment.     See Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 641-1(a) (2016);
Hawai i Rules of Civil Procedure Rules 54(b), 58; Jenkins v.
Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawai i 115, 119, 869 P.2d
1334, 1338 (1994).       Further, the 5/18/22 Order is not
independently appealable under the collateral-order doctrine, the
Forgay1 doctrine, or HRS § 641-1(b).             See Greer v. Baker, 137

     1
         Forgay v. Conrad, 47 U.S. 201 (1848).
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Hawai i 249, 253, 369 P.3d 832, 836 (2016) (setting forth the
requirements for appealability under the collateral-order
doctrine and the Forgay doctrine); HRS § 641-1(b) (specifying
requirements for leave to file interlocutory appeal).
          Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is
dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
          DATED:   Honolulu, Hawai i, May 25, 2023.

                                      /s/ Lisa M. Ginoza
                                      Chief Judge

                                      /s/ Karen T. Nakasone
                                      Associate Judge

                                      /s/ Derrick H.M. Chan
                                      Associate Judge

                                  2