Tagama v. Fortune Foods Hawaii, Inc.

• Court: Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
• Decided: September 30, 2025
• Docket: CAAP-25-0000534
• Status: Published

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 30-SEP-2025 08:32 AM Dkt. 29 OGMD

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

MARIO TAGAMA, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant, v. FORTUNE FOODS HAWAII, INC. dba SEAFOOD CITY SUPERMARKET, CATHERINE BALON, MARIE SHIRAISHI, JOHN S. MACKEY, Defendants/Counterclaimants-Appellees, and JOHN DOE 1-10, JANE DOE 1-10, DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10, DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10 AND DOE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CASE NO. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL (By: Hiraoka, Presiding Judge, and Wadsworth and McCullen, JJ.) Upon consideration of Defendants/Counterclaimants- Appellees Fortune Foods Hawaii, Inc., dba Seafood City Supermarket, Catherine Balon, Marie Shiraishi, and John S. Mackey's (collectively, Appellees) September 17, 2025 Motion to Dismiss Appeal, the papers in support and in opposition, and the record, it appears that Appellees seek dismissal of the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Self-represented Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant- Appellant Mario Tagama appeals from the June 30, 2025 "Order Granting [Appellees'] Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint, Filed March 17, 2025 [Dkt. 19], Filed April 2, 2025 [Dkt. 37]" (June 30, 2025 Order). The court lacks appellate jurisdiction because the Circuit Court has not entered a final, appealable order or judgment, see Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 641-1(a) NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER

(2016); Hawai#i Rules of Civil Procedure Rules 54(b), 58; Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawai#i 115, 119, 869 P.2d 1334, 1338 (1994), and the June 30, 2025 Order is not independently appealable under the collateral-order or Forgay1 doctrines, nor has the Circuit Court granted leave for interlocutory appeal under HRS § 641-1(b) (2016). See Greer v. Baker, 137 Hawai#i 249, 253, 369 P.3d 832, 836 (2016) (setting forth the requirements for appealability under the collateral- order doctrine and the Forgay doctrine); HRS § 641-1(b) (specifying requirements for leave to file interlocutory appeal). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss Appeal is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 30, 2025.

/s/ Keith K. Hiroka Presiding Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth Associate Judge

/s/ Sonja M.P. Mccullen Associate Judge

1 Forgay v. Conrad, 47 U.S. 201 (1848).