PART I. 
APPEALS IN CIVIL ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS



 



§641-1  Appeals
as of right or interlocutory, civil matters.  (a)  [L 2004, c 202, §66
amendment repealed June 30, 2010.  L 2006, c 94, §1.]  Appeals shall be
allowed in civil matters from all final judgments, orders, or decrees of
circuit and district courts and the land court to the intermediate appellate
court, subject to chapter 602.



(b)  Upon application made within the time
provided by the rules of court, an appeal in a civil matter may be allowed by a
circuit court in its discretion from an order denying a motion to dismiss or
from any interlocutory judgment, order, or decree whenever the circuit court
may think the same advisable for the speedy termination of litigation before
it.  The refusal of the circuit court to allow an appeal from an interlocutory
judgment, order, or decree shall not be reviewable by any other court.



(c)  An appeal shall be taken in the manner and
within the time provided by the rules of court. [L 1892, c 57, §69; am L 1892,
c 109, §1; am L 1898, c 40, §1; RL 1925, §2509; RL 1935, §3501; am L 1939, c
18, §1; am L 1941, c 122, §1; RL 1945, §9503; am L 1945, c 194, §1; RL 1955,
§208-3; HRS §641-2; am L 1972, c 89, pt of §5; ren HRS §641-1; am L 1979, c
111, §6(1); am L 2004, c 202, §66]



 



Note



 



  L 2004, c 202, §82 provides:



  "SECTION 82.  Appeals pending in the supreme court as of
the effective date of this Act [July 1, 2006] may be transferred to the
intermediate appellate court or retained at the supreme court as the chief justice,
in the chief justice's sole discretion, directs."



 



Rules of Court



 



  Appeals, when taken, see HRAP rule 4.



 



Law Journals and Reviews



 



  Interlocutory and Final Appeals in Hawaii.  9 HBJ 45.



  Appellate Caseload in Hawaii.  13 HBJ No. 3 Fall 1977, pg. 3.



  Through the Looking Glass--Finality, Interlocutory Appeals
and the Hawaii Supreme Court's Supervisory Powers.  9 UH L. Rev. 87.



  Striking a Balance:  Procedural Reform Under the Lum Court.  14 UH L. Rev. 223.



 



Case Notes



 



  Judgment as to one and not all of multiple parties is
interlocutory and not appealable without allowance by circuit court.  51 H.
137, 453 P.2d 753; 51 H. 307, 459 P.2d 195.



  Interlocutory appeal requires allowance of court.  51 H. 480,
463 P.2d 530.



  Finality of order or decree, how determined.  54 H. 276, 506
P.2d 1.



  Appeals to circuit courts under §286-157, involving
revocation of driver's license, not superseded by this section.  54 H. 519, 511
P.2d 161.



  Procedural orders leaving cause pending held interlocutory. 
56 H. 662, 548 P.2d 251.



  No jurisdiction of appeal prior to final judgment, unless
allowed as interlocutory appeal.  57 H. 61, 549 P.2d 477.



  When trial court refuses appeal from interlocutory order,
supreme court is without jurisdiction.  57 H. 73, 549 P.2d 1147.



  Where disposition of case involving multiple claims or
parties is embodied in several orders, collectively the orders can constitute a
final judgment.  57 H. 273, 554 P.2d 233.



  Divorce decree is final and appealable despite reservation of
support or custody question.  57 H. 519, 559 P.2d 744.



  Burden is on appellant to prove that factual findings of
judge were clearly erroneous.  57 H. 599, 561 P.2d 1286.



  Appeal from summary judgment held premature since other
claims remained pending.  58 H. 552, 574 P.2d 884.



  Motions, timely filed after judgment, toll running of time
for appeal until court's ruling on the motions.  58 H. 552, 574 P.2d 884.



  The prerequisite for an appellate court to find abuse of
discretion is that all appraisals of the evidence would result in a different
finding.  60 H. 354, 590 P.2d 80.



  Since factfinder's interpretation of a nondiscrimination
provision was reasonable it was not set aside on appeal.  60 H. 361, 590 P.2d
993.



  Trial court's resolving of conflicting evidence will not be
set aside unless clearly erroneous.  60 H. 381, 590 P.2d 564.



  Order imposing sanctions for failure to provide discovery may
be immediately appealed.  60 H. 467, 591 P.2d 1060.



  Order granting disqualification of attorney is interlocutory and
not appealable without leave of court but writ of mandamus may be available. 
61 H. 552, 606 P.2d 1320.



  Court abused discretion in allowing interlocutory appeal.  63
H. 668, 634 P.2d 595.



  State was "aggrieved" by order to pay attorney's
fees even though no further liability imposed.  64 H. 345, 641 P.2d 1321.



  Trial court shall carefully consider whether an interlocutory
appeal will more speedily determine litigation, and set forth its reasons if it
so concludes.  67 H. 510, 694 P.2d 388.



  Orders denying stay and application for arbitration are
appealable.  68 H. 98, 705 P.2d 28.



  Denial of motion to quash garnishee summons was not a final
appealable order.  68 H. 368, 714 P.2d 936.



  Appealability of foreclosure decree in multiple-party or
multiple-issue case.  69 H. 11, 731 P.2d 151.



  Order was appealable where it stayed judgment for lease
termination pending arbitration to determine value of leasehold improvements. 
69 H. 112, 736 P.2d 55.



  Grant of interlocutory appeal was improper.  71 H. 644, 802
P.2d 480.



  Orders denying an application for a stay of proceedings until
arbitration had been completed made in accordance with §658-5 are appealable
orders under subsection (a).  73 H. 433, 834 P.2d 1294.



  Orders compelling arbitration under §658-3 are appealable
orders within meaning of this section.  74 H. 210, 847 P.2d 652.



  Jurisdiction properly lies in supreme court to hear and
determine appeals from district court judgments after an administrative
hearing, pursuant to §602-5(1) and subsection (a).  75 H. 1, 856 P.2d 1207.



  Plaintiff had standing to appeal on ground it was aggrieved
by summary judgment order because its interest in obtaining injunctive relief
against defendant-appellee increased if plaintiff did not prevail against
defendant-appellant.  75 H. 370, 862 P.2d 1048.



  Supreme court was vested with appellate jurisdiction, where
family court's determination of jurisdiction, followed by award of foster
custody, met requisite degree of finality of an appealable order.  77 H. 109,
883 P.2d 30.



  Sanctions order was not a final appealable order, where
sanctions order failed to satisfy strict prerequisites of collateral order
doctrine; appeal dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.  77 H. 157, 883
P.2d 78.



  Order denying employer's motion to intervene constituted a
final appealable order.  79 H. 352, 903 P.2d 48.



  Circuit court dismissal of case without prejudice did not
affect appellate jurisdiction.  81 H. 171, 914 P.2d 1364.



  Where intervenors-defendants were parties to action, received
circuit court permission to file interlocutory appeal and did file notice of
appeal, no reason to dismiss appeal based on standing or other jurisdictional
issues under this section.  87 H. 91, 952 P.2d 379.



  There is no appellate jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals
of discovery orders regarding the production of documents against a claim of
attorney-client privilege.  88 H. 319, 966 P.2d 631.



  Though supreme court's jurisdiction over an appeal is
limited, pursuant to subsection (a), to a review of final judgments, orders,
and decrees, where appellant would have been subjected to irreparable injury if
appellate review awaited the final outcome of the unresolved garnishment
matters, the garnishee order was immediately appealable pursuant to the Forgay
rule.  90 H. 345, 978 P.2d 783.



  An order that fully disposes of an action in district court
may be final and appealable without the entry of judgment on a separate
document, as long as the appealed order ends the litigation by fully deciding
the rights and liabilities of all parties and leaves nothing further to be
adjudicated.  91 H. 425, 984 P.2d 1251.



  The fact that the question of who was responsible for payment
for particular services received by the children could be decided independently
from the need for the family court's continuing jurisdiction, coupled with the
importance of obtaining a definitive ruling on the issue, established that the
"requisite degree of finality" was present to permit appellate
jurisdiction.  96 H. 272, 30 P.3d 878.



  Trial court's order was appealable under subsection (a) as it
granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion, ordering return of
garnished funds, awarding costs, and denying request for attorneys' fees,
disposing of all issues raised in the motion; order left nothing further to be
accomplished and was, therefore, final.  103 H. 153, 80 P.3d 974.



  Where final order was not reduced to a separate judgment as
required by HRCP rule 58, it was not appealable under this section.  113 H.
406, 153 P.3d 1091.



  Foreclosure decree is deemed final for appeal purposes
although many matters remain unsettled.  2 H. App. 140, 627 P.2d 296.



  Appeal declared frivolous, where appellant appealed decree of
foreclosure in a multiple claims and multiple parties case without an HRCP
54(b) certification and later argued lack of appellate jurisdiction because of
lack of the certification.  2 H. App. 140, 627 P.2d 296.



  Order awarding broker's fees in a foreclosure sale case does
not have the finality required by subsection (a).  2 H. App. 151, 627 P.2d 304.



  Interlocutory injunctions, when appealable without allowance
of trial court.  2 H. App. 272, 630 P.2d 646.



  Judgment in a multiple claims and multiple parties case is
not reviewable absent certification under HRCP 54(b).  2 H. App. 296, 630 P.2d
1084.



  Order was interlocutory where it decided liability but left
relief pending.  5 H. App. 20, 674 P.2d 1024.



  Not enlarged or modified by HRCP 54; where case involves
multiple claims or parties, appellate jurisdiction of those fully decided
claims or rights must be based on satisfaction of HRCP 54 requirements.  5 H.
App. 222, 686 P.2d 37.



  Order adjudging paternity but reserving child support,
custody, and other matters is not final and appealable.  5 H. App. 610, 704
P.2d 940.



  Interlocutory appeal by lienor must be sought under this
section or HRCP Rule 54(b).  7 H. App. 152, 748 P.2d 1370.



  Court lacked jurisdiction to hear appeal from summary
judgment where claims of party in interest not named in notice of appeal
remained pending.  8 H. App. 431, 807 P.2d 606.



  Probate court's decision that a parcel of real property is
not part of decedent's estate is an appealable collateral order.  83 H. 412
(App.), 927 P.2d 420.



  Plaintiff's appeal of causation order untimely where
plaintiff's notice of appeal was filed within thirty days of written order
granting plaintiff's motion for leave to file interlocutory appeal, but not
within thirty days of order appealed from.  86 H. 301 (App.), 949 P.2d 141.



  Where Hawaii supreme court entered an order dismissing the
appeal of an order selling property, on the ground that "a final judgment
closing the proceeding has not been entered" and the "order approving
the sale of real property was an interlocutory order that was not certified for
interlocutory appeal", appellate court did not have jurisdiction to decide
the point on appeal.  105 H. 507 (App.), 100 P.3d 77.



  Where all claims against all parties had not been finally
decided when the notices of appeal were filed, appellate court did not have
appellate jurisdiction and appeal was dismissed for lack of appellate
jurisdiction.  112 H. 367 (App.), 145 P.3d 910.



  Circuit court's order, to the extent that it denied
defendant's request to compel arbitration, was an appealable order where order
fell within a small class of orders that were appealable because "the
rights conferred by chapter 658 [repealed], if applicable, would be lost,
probably irreparably" if the party was required to wait until final
judgment to effectively review the order.  118 H. 308 (App.), 188 P.3d 822.