Quitan v. Coelho
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 25172 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I VICTOR C. QUITAN, JR., Plaintiff-Appellee vs. JULIA FRANCESCA COELHO, Defendant-Appellant APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CIV. NO. 1RC01-4789) ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Ramil, and Acoba, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that the June 6, 2002 judgment for possession filed in Civil No. 1RC01-4789 is immediately appealable under the Forgay doctrine, even though the claim for damages and the counterclaim have not been resolved. See Ciesla v. Reddish, 78 Hawai#i 18, 20, 889 P.2d 702, 704 (1995). The June 20, 2002 notice of appeal, which designates the June 6, 2002 writ of possession as the judgment appealed, fairly implies an intent to appeal the June 6, 2002 judgment for possession. See City & County of Honolulu v. Midkiff, 57 Haw. 273, 275-76, 554 P.2d 233, 235 (1976). However, the appeal of the judgment for possession is moot inasmuch appellant legally cannot regain possession of the subject premises if the judgment for possession is vacated on appeal. See Exit Co. Ltd. Partnership v. Airlines Capital Corp., 7 Haw. App. 363, 766 P.2d 129 (1988). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this appeal is dismissed as moot. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 10, 2002. 2
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.
