Preview:

*** NO T FO R PUBLICATION ***
NO. 26152 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I JUNIE BARNEDO and JUAN BARNEDO, Plaintiffs-Appellees vs. ERLINDA DOMINGUEZ, dba THE LAW OFFICES OF ERLINDA DOMINGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant and RON R. ASHLOCK; THOMAS KASTER; WILLIAM COPULOS; DAVID KUWAHARA; THOMAS WALSH; JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10; ROE "NON-PROFIT" CORPORATIONS 1-10; and ROE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT (CIV. NO. 99-2847) ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that Civil No. 99-2847 asserted a first claim for legal malpractice and a second claim for negligent supervision against defendant Erlinda Dominguez. The October 14, 2003 judgment, the Honorable

Victoria S. Marks, presiding, which purports to be the final judgment in Civil No. 99-2847, enters judgment for $478,875.09 and $5,000 in favor of the plaintiffs and against defendant Dominguez, but does not identify the claim for which the judgment is entered, as required by Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawai#i 115, 119-120, 869 P.2d 1334, 1339-39 (1994)(In a multiple claim, multiple party circuit court case, a judgment

*** NO T FO R PUBLICATION ***
that purports to be the final judgment is not appealable unless the judgment identifies the claims for which the judgment is entered.). Thus, this appeal is premature and we lack Therefore,

jurisdiction.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this appeal is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, January 26, 2004.

2



Download Barnedo v. Dominguez.pdf

Hawaii Law