*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION ***
NO. 27628
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI`I
HUI MALAMA I NA KUPUNA O HAWAII NEI, a Hawai`i non-profit
corporation, PAULETTE KAANOHIOKALANI
KALEIKINI,
Plaintiffs-Appellants
vs.
WAL-MART a Delaware Corporation
doing business in Hawai`i; STATE
OF HAWAI`I; PETER YOUNG; in his official
capacity as the Director
of the Department of Land and Natural Resources of the State of
Hawai`i; DEPARTMENT OF
LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES; STATE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION DIVISION; HOLLY McELDOWNEY, in
her official capacity
as the Acting Administrator of the State Historic Preservation
Division of the Department of Land and
Natural Resources; CITY
and COUNTY OF HONOLULU; DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND PERMITTING FOR
THE CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU; HENRY ENG, in his official
capacity as the Director of the Department of
Planning and
Permitting for the City and County of Honolulu,
Defendants-Appellees
and
JOHN
DOES 2-10, JANE DOES 1-10, DOE Corporations, Partnerships,
Governmental Units or Other Entities 4-20,
Defendants
APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT
(CIV. NO.
03-1-1112)
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
(By: Nakayama,
J., for the court
(1))
Upon review of the
record, it appears that the October 26, 2005 judgment, the Honorable
Victoria S. Marks, presiding,
entered judgment on the claim against the City defendants and finally
determined all claims against all the parties in Civil
No. 03-1-1112. The October 26, 2005 judgment did not on its face
resolve all claims against all the parties inasmuch as it
did not dismiss the claims against the State defendants. See Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming &
Wright, 76 Hawai`i 115,
119, 869 P.2d 1334, 1338 (1994)(in a multiple-claim or
multiple-party circuit court case,
the HRCP 58 final judgment "[must], on its face, . . .
resolve all claims against all parties[.]"). The August 24, 2005
dismissal
of the claims against the State defendants had to be included in an
HRCP 58 final
judgment inasmuch as the August 24, 2005 dismissal was not signed by
the City
defendants and was not a stipulated dismissal pursuant to HRCP
41(a)(1)(B) signed
by all the parties who appeared in Civil No. 03-1-1112. See HRCP 41(a)(1)(B);
Amantiad v. Odom, 90
Hawai`i 152, 158 n.7, 977 P.2d 160, 166 n.7 (1999)(HRCP 58
does not apply when claims are dismissed by stipulation pursuant to
HRCP
41(a)(1)(B)). The October 26, 2005 judgment purported to be certified
under HRCP
54(b), but HRCP 54(b) was inapplicable inasmuch no further claims were
left to be
determined in Civil No. 03-1-1112. See International Savings & Loan
Ass'n v.
Woods, 69 Haw. 11, 18, 731 P.2d 151, 157 (1987)(HRCP 54(b)
applies when "the trial
court chooses to enter a judgment on one or more claims or as to one or
more
parties in a multiple-claim or multiple-party case and there are claims
yet to be
determined."). Thus, this appeal is premature and we lack jurisdiction.
Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that this appeal is dismissed for lack of appellate
jurisdiction.
DATED: Honolulu,
Hawai`i, April 19, 2006.
1.
Considered by: Moon,
C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, and Duffy, JJ. and Circuit Judge Ahn, in
place of Acoba, J., recused.