NO. 29707
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
IN
THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I
v.
_________________________
v.
Upon review of the record, it appears that we lack jurisdiction over the appeal that Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff/Cross-Claim Plaintiff/Cross-Claim Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff/Appellant State of Hawai‘i (Appellant State) has asserted from the Honorable Kathleen N. A. Watanabe's February 20, 2009 "Final Judgment Pursuant to Rule 54(b) Regarding Defendant Kilauea Irrigation Company, Inc.'s[,] Duty to Defend Defendant State of Hawaii" (the February 20, 2009 HRCP Rule 54(b)-certified judgment).
Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 641-1(a) (1993 & Supp. 2008) authorizes appeals to the intermediate court of appeals from final judgments, orders, or decrees. Appeals under HRS § 641-1 "shall be taken in the manner . . . provided by the rules of the court." HRS § 641-1(c) (1993 & Supp. 2008). Rule 58 of the Hawai‘i Rules of Civil Procedure (HRCP) requires that "[e]very judgment shall be set forth on a separate document." HRCP Rule 58. Based on this requirement under HRCP Rule 58, the Supreme Court of Hawai‘i has held that "[a]n appeal may be taken . . . only after the orders have been reduced to a judgment and the judgment has been entered in favor of and against the appropriate parties pursuant to HRCP [Rule] 58[.]" Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawai‘i 115, 119, 869 P.2d 1334, 1338 (1994).
[I]f a judgment purports to be the final judgment in a case involving multiple claims or multiple parties, the judgment (a) must specifically identify the party or parties for and against whom the judgment is entered, and (b) must (i) identify the claims for which it is entered, and (ii) dismiss any claims not specifically identified[.]
Id. (emphases added).For example: "Pursuant to the jury verdict entered on (date), judgment in the amount of $___ is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff X and against Defendant Y upon counts I through IV of the complaint." A statement that declares "there are no other outstanding claims" is not a judgment. If the circuit court intends that claims other than those listed in the judgment language should be dismissed, it must say so: for example, "Defendant Y's counterclaim is dismissed," or "Judgment upon Defendant Y's counterclaim is entered in favor of Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Z," or "all other claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims are dismissed."
Id. at 119-20 n.4, 869 P.2d at 1338-39 n.4 (emphases added).The February 20, 2009 HRCP Rule 54(b)-certified judgment does not express how the circuit court intends to enter judgment. Instead, the February 20, 2009 HRCP Rule 54(b)-certified judgment vaguely purports to enter judgment, but without specifically identifying the party or parties in favor of whom and against whom judgment is entered, without explaining the manner (e.g., in part or in whole) in which the circuit court is entering judgment on a claim or claims, and without specifically identifying the claim or claims (e.g., a party's complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim). The February 20, 2009 HRCP Rule 54(b)-certified judgment is too vague to satisfy the requirements for an appealable judgment under the holding in Jenkins.
Absent an appealable final judgment, Appellant State's appeal is premature and we lack appellate jurisdiction over appellate court case number 29707.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that appellate court case number 29707 is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, August 18, 2009.