Hawaii Ventures, Inc. v. Otaka, Inc.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

*** NO T FO R PUBLICATION *** NO. 25881 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I HAWAII VENTURES, LLC, Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant/Appellee/ Appellant/Cross-Appellant/Cross-Appellee vs. OTAKA, INC. and YUKIO TAKAHASHI, Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaintiffs/Cross-Claim Defendants/Appellees/Cross-Appellants/Cross-Appellees and TAKAO BUILDING CO., LTD. (TAKAO), K.K. DAINI SEVEN (DAINI SEVEN), HAWAIIAN WAIKIKI BEACH, INC., Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaintiffs/Appellees/CrossAppellants/Cross-Appellees and ALAKA#I MECHANICAL CORPORATION, and HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, Defendants/Appellees/Cross-Appellees and BUSINESS MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC., Defendant/Cross-Claim Plaintiff/Appellee/Cross-Appellee and BEACH SNACK EXPRESS, INC., dba HAMACHAYA JUBEI, and HAWAII ENERGY MANAGEMENT CO., LLC Defendants/Appellees/Cross-Appellees and ILWU LOCAL 142, AFL-CIO Intervenor-Defendant/Appellant/Appellee/Cross-Appellee and *** NO T FO R PUBLICATION *** THEODORE H. SMYTH, AS TRUSTEE OF THE SMYTH FAMILY TRUSTS, and KARL W. WILLIG Intervenors-Defendants/CounterclaimPlaintiffs/Appellees/Appellants/Cross-Appellees and ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY, Intervenor-Defendant/Appellee/Cross-Appellee and LEUCADIA NATIONAL CORPORATION, Additional Counterclaim-Defendant/Appellee/Cross-Appellee and PATRICIA KIM PARK, Receiver/Appellee/Cross-Appellee and WILLIAM D. UDANI, MYRNA F. COSTA, MARY ANN E. ACIO, JACINTA AGONOY, ROSITA A. ANCHETA, ZOSIMO A. ARISTA, GARY C. M. AU, TOMASA E. BALIJNASAY, ERNA M. BAQUIEL, NELIA C. BOLOSAN, CATHY B. CABERTO, LYDIA CABICO, HALARIO G. CABILES, PERLITA N. CABUENA, CONRADO A. CANDELARIO, ERLINDA C. CORRALES, PO WU CHAN, PATRICIA M. CHING, WAYNE K. Y. CHUNG, ROSITA F. COLOMA, SINFOROSA S. CORPUZ, DEBORAH J. DAVIS, BINATE DELLATAN, ANACLETA DOMINGO, PRISCILLA DUNAWAY, DELPHINA J. FULLER, SEGIBERTO G. GONO, YUNG HEE HAN, PATTI R. HONJIYO, JOHNNY Y. ILORETA, RICHARD D. JAEGER, JOSEPH KAUNAMANO, JR., MAILE F. KALAPA, WILLEDA KEPA, ANNA KIM, TINA M. KIM, ANDRES C. LACAR, LEONILA G. LAUER, ROSITA A. LAZO, JR., KARL LINDO, KATHLEEN L. LUKA, KEUM JA LEE, NESTOR S. MADAMBA, ANITA Z. MAGALLANES, GERTIE P. MAGAOAY, LADDAR C. MALLARE, MAGDALENA S. MANDING, FLORENCIA C. MANERA, IGOA T. MULLER, DAVID CHI KEUNG NG, MARCUS NGIRTURONG, CHAUNCEY C. NICOLA, III, DAWSON B. VON OELHOFFEN, JERRY A. PABRO, EGMIDIA T. PASCUA, LETICIA T. PAUSO, DOMINGA PERALTA, ANA T. QUIBEANTOS, JUANITA RAMOS, ENCARNACION V. RIVERA, ROBERT ROWLAND, SCOTT S. SATO, SILVERIANO SEBASTIAN, VAIMOANA T. SEVELO, MARY PAT SOLIVEN, YUN HIE TANIGUCHI, SETAITA T. TAULANI, EMILIA B. TUPINIO, ROSEMARIE A. UDANI, ANECITA F. UGALE, JUANITA G. UNGOS, LONGOMAILEA VAIOLETI, JUDITH VERSOZA, CHUNG LEONG WONG, DOLORES A. YOKOI, KENNETH K. YOSHIDA, NOBUKO YOSHIDA, and ANDY S. C. YOUNG Intervenors/Appellees/Appellants/Cross-Appellees 2 *** NO T FO R PUBLICATION *** APPEALS FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT (CIV. NO. 00-1-2427) ORDER DISMISSING APPEALS AND CROSS-APPEALS (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that we lack jurisdiction over these appeals and cross-appeals case because the Honorable Karen N. Blondin s May 14, 2003 final judgment, May 14, 2003 deficiency judgment, and June 18, 2003 judgment do not satisfy the requirements for an appealable final judgment. With respect to the requirement of a final judgment, order or decree pursuant to HRS § 641-1(a) (1993), [t]his court has previously noted that foreclosure cases are bifurcated into two separately appealable parts: (1) the decree of foreclosure and the order of sale, if the order of sale is incorporated within the decree; and (2) all other orders. Beneficial Hawai#i, Inc. v. Casey, 98 Hawai#i 159, 165, 45 P.3d 359, 365 (2002) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). Therefore, although the foreclosure decree in part-one of a foreclosure case is immediately appealable upon entry, the matters subsequent to the foreclosure decree, [i.e., in part-two of a foreclosure case,] such as the confirmation of sale or the issuance and enforcement of the writ of possession . . . would have to wait until entry of the circuit court s final order in the case. Id. (citation omitted). [T]he last and final order . . . [in part-two of a foreclosure case] is usually the deficiency judgment. Security Pacific Mortgage Corporation v. Miller, 71 Haw. 65, 70, 783 P.2d 855, 858 (1989) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); Hoge v. Kane, 4 Haw. App. 246, 247, 663 P.2d 645, 647 (1983) ( In foreclosure cases, which result in a deficiency, the last and final order . . . is usually the deficiency judgment. ). In the instant case, the Appellants and Cross-Appellants are attempting to appeal from the three 3 *** NO T FO R PUBLICATION *** above-mentioned judgments in part-two of this foreclosure case. In order to implement the finality requirement under HRS § 641-1(a) (1993), Rule 58 of the Hawai#i Rules of Civil Procedure (HRCP) requires the entry of a separate judgment. An appeal may be taken from circuit court orders resolving claims against parties only after the orders have been reduced to a judgment and the judgment has been entered in favor of and against the appropriate parties pursuant to HRCP [Rule] 58[.] Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawai#i 115, 119, 869 P.2d 1334, 1338 (1994). [I]f a judgment purports to be the final judgment in a case involving multiple claims or multiple partes, the judgment (a) must specifically identify the party or parties for and against whom the judgment is entered, and (b) must (i) identify the claims for which it is entered, and (ii) dismiss any claims not specifically identified[.] Id. For example: Pursuant to the jury verdict entered on (date), judgment in the amount of $___ is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff X and against Defendant Y upon counts I through IV of the complaint. A statement that declares there are no other outstanding claims is not a judgment. If the circuit court intends that claims other than those listed in the judgment language should be dismissed, it must say so; for example, Defendant Y s counterclaim is dismissed, or Judgment upon Defendant Y s counterclaim is entered in favor of Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Z, or all other claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims are dismissed. Id. at 119-20 n.4, 869 P.2d at 1338-39 n.4 (emphases added). [A]n appeal from any judgment will be dismissed as premature if the judgment does not, on its face, either resolve all claims against all parties or contain the finding necessary for certification under HRCP [Rule] 54(b). Id. at 119, 869 P.2d at 1338. Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant/Appellee/Appellant/ 4 *** NO T FO R PUBLICATION *** Cross-Appellant/Cross-Appellee Hawaii Ventures, LLC, asserted its complaint for foreclosure against multiple parties. Furthermore, various other parties asserted claims, counterclaims and crossclaims. Despite the existence of multiple parties and multiple claims, none of the three judgments in part-two of this foreclosure case specifically identifies and resolves all of the multiple claims against all of the multiple parties. Although some of the judgments resolve some of the claims, none of the judgments either (1) dismisses all other claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims, or (2) contains an express finding of no just reason for delay in the entry of judgment pursuant to HRCP Rule 54(b). Therefore, the May 14, 2003 deficiency judgment, the May 14, 2003 final judgment, and the June 18, 2003 judgment do not satisfy the HRCP Rule 58 separate judgment requirement under the holding in Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright. Absent an appealable final judgment, the appeals and cross-appeals are premature. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeals and cross-appeals are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 16, 2003. 5

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.