Preview:

NO. 23843 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I MYLES TAMASHIRO, WARREN TOYAMA, HEATHER FARMER, FILO TU, JEANETTE TU, LYNN MISAKI, CLYDE OTA, MIRIAM ONOMURA, and YOSHIKO NISHIMURA, Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants vs. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, STATE OF HAWAI#I; JON L. KOKI, in his capacity as Business Manager for Ho'Opono, NEIL SHIM, in his capacity of Administrator of the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, State of Hawai#i Department of Human Services; DAVE EVELAND, in his capacity of Administrator of the Services to the Blind branch of the State of Hawai#i Department of Human Services; and SUSAN CHANDLER, in her capacity as Director of the State of Hawai#i Department of Human Services, Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees and CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Defendant (CIV. NO. 96-3011) ----------------------------------------------------------------CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Appellant vs. SUSAN CHANDLER, in her capacity as Director of the Department of Human Services State of Hawai#i; and DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Appellees (CIV. NO. 97-2826) ----------------------------------------------------------------COUNTY OF HAWAI#I, Appellant vs. SUSAN CHANDLER, in her capacity as Director of the Department of Human Services State of Hawai#i; and DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SEVICES, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Appellees (CIV. NO. 97-342 (Hilo)) APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT (CIV. NOS. 96-3011, 97-2826, & 97-342 (Hilo))

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Ramil, and Acoba, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that: (1) the September 27, 2000 judgment, which enters judgment on the claims against the state defendants, does not show finality as to all claims asserted in Civil No. 96-3011 inasmuch as it does not dismiss or enter judgment on the claims against defendant City and County of Honolulu, as required by HRCP 58; see Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawai#i 115, 119-20, 869 P.2d 1334, 1339-39 (1994) (In a multiple party circuit court case, a judgment that purports to be the final judgment is not appealable unless the judgment, on its face, shows finality as to all claims against all the parties.); and, thus, (2) this appeal is premature and we lack jurisdiction. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this appeal and cross-appeal are dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, January 31, 2001.



Download Tamashiro v. Department of Human Services, State.pdf

Hawaii Law