Background
This case arose from a landlord-tenant dispute in the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit of Hawaii (Case No. 3CCV-23-0000344), in which plaintiff-appellee Robert Craig Kern brought suit against defendant-appellant Shanette Bannister. Bannister appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals, but the appellate record revealed a problem with the finality of the underlying judgment.
In an effort to cure the deficiency, the ICA temporarily remanded the case to the circuit court on May 14, 2026, specifically directing entry of an appealable judgment. The circuit court responded by entering an Amended Judgment on June 4, 2026, purporting to certify a final judgment under Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 54(b).
The Court’s Holding
The ICA dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the Amended Judgment was neither final nor appealable despite its Rule 54(b) certification language. The court identified three specific deficiencies: the judgment contemplated the future addition of “eviction costs,” failed to liquidate the precise amount Bannister owed for unpaid rent after February 28, 2024, and expressly allowed Kern to file a future claim for property damage occurring after August 27, 2024 — the effective date of the writ and judgment of possession.
Because the Amended Judgment left these monetary and damages issues unresolved and open to further proceedings, it did not constitute a final, appealable judgment. The court ordered dismissal pursuant to Hawaii Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 36(b)(1), with no judgment on the merits to be entered by the appellate court.
Key Takeaways
- A judgment that contemplates future additions — such as unliquidated costs or claims reserved for later filing — does not qualify as a final, appealable judgment even if it invokes HRCP Rule 54(b) certification language.
- All monetary obligations, including unpaid rent amounts and cost awards, must be fully liquidated in the judgment before appellate jurisdiction attaches.
- A temporary remand for entry of an appealable judgment does not guarantee appellate jurisdiction; the circuit court’s resulting judgment must independently satisfy finality requirements.
Why It Matters
This order is a practical reminder for Hawaii litigants and practitioners that a judgment’s invocation of Rule 54(b) does not automatically confer finality — courts will look past the label to examine whether any issues remain open. Landlord-tenant cases in particular often involve rolling damages (ongoing unpaid rent, post-possession property damage) that can make it difficult to achieve a truly final judgment at an early stage.
Attorneys handling eviction and possession actions should ensure that all anticipated costs and damage claims are resolved and liquidated before seeking an appeal, or risk dismissal and the delay and expense of returning to the circuit court to cure the deficiency.