Association of Apartment Owners of Kuhio Shores at Poipu v. Gilliam

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
16-JUN-2026
08:10 AM
Dkt. 25 ODSLJ

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF KUHIO SHORES AT POIPU,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
WILLIAM H. GILLIAM, Defendant-Appellant,
and
PACIFIC RIM PROPERTY SERVICE CORPORATION, a Hawaiʻi Corporation;
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, COUNTY OF KAUAʻI,
JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10;
DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10; DOE ENTITIES 1-10; and
DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS 1-10, Defendants-Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
(CASE NO. 5CC161000063)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL
FOR LACK OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION
(By: Nakasone, Chief Judge, Wadsworth and Gluck, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Plaintiff-Appellee Association
of Apartment Owners of Kuhio Shores at Poipu's (AOAO) Motion to
Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Appellate Jurisdiction, the papers in
support and in opposition, and the record, it appears that the
AOAO seeks dismissal of this appeal from the Circuit Court of
the Fifth Circuit's March 25, 2026 "Order Granting Receiver's
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Non-Hearing Motion to Substitute Realtor, Filed on February 26,
2026, Dkt. 505" (Substitution Order).
The court lacks appellate jurisdiction because the
Circuit Court has not entered a final, appealable order or
judgment, see Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (HRS) § 641-1(a) (2016);
Hawaiʻi Rules of Civil Procedure Rules 54(b), 58; Jenkins v.
Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawaiʻi 115, 119, 869 P.2d
1334, 1338 (1994), and the Substitution Order is not
independently appealable under the collateral order or Forgay 1
doctrines, nor has the Circuit Court granted leave for an
interlocutory appeal under HRS § 641-1(b). See Greer, 137
Hawaiʻi at 253, 369 P.3d at 836 (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 this appeal is
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, June 16, 2026.
/s/ Karen T. Nakasone
Chief Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
Associate Judge

/s/ Daniel M. Gluck
Associate Judge

1 Forgay v. Conrad, 47 U.S. 201 (1848). The Forgay doctrine authorizes
an appeal from (1) a judgment for immediate execution against an interest in
real property that is (2) effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final
judgment. Greer v. Baker, 137 Hawaiʻi 249, 253, 369 P.3d 832, 836 (2016).
The Substitution Order does not command immediate execution against an
interest in real property. See, e.g., Malagodi v. Nice, Nos. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
and CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, 2026 WL 937700, (App. Apr. 7, 2026) (SDO) (concluding
that the court lacked appellate jurisdiction over an order denying a motion
for a stay of a separate order, that was itself appealable under Forgay,
because the order appealed-from did "not command an immediate transfer of
property or order the sale of the property").

2