Uchima v. Durst Corp.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 23864 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I TOSHIO UCHIMA, Individually and as Guardian Prochein Ami for HERMAN UCHIMA and DUSTIN UCHIMA, minors; and YOKO UCHIMA, Plaintiffs-Appellees vs. DURST CORP., Defendant-Appellant and ERECT-A-TUBE INC. and ROTOR WING HAWAII INC., Defendants-Appellees and JOHN DOES 1-10 and DOE ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT (CIV. NO. 98-2949) ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Ramil, and Acoba, JJ.) Upon review of the statements supporting and contesting jurisdiction and the record, it appears that: (1) the July 20, 2000 judgment, which enters judgment on the plaintiffs claims against defendant Durst Corp., does not show finality as to all claims asserted in Civil No. 98-2949 inasmuch as it does not dismiss or enter judgment on the plaintiffs claims against defendants Erect-A-Tube and Rotor Wing Hawaii, 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 is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, January 31, 2001.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
