The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals has dismissed an appeal from Central Pacific Bank due to a lack of jurisdiction. This decision affects the bank's ongoing legal battle regarding a foreclosure case involving multiple parties. The ruling underscores the importance of having a final, appealable judgment before pursuing an appeal in court.
The case, Central Pacific Bank v. Alcos, was filed under docket number CAAP-25-0000414. It stems from a dispute over a foreclosure action that the bank initiated against David Augustine Alcos, III, and several other defendants, including Ralena P.B. Alcos and the Association of Apartment Owners of Alcos Estates. The bank sought to appeal a series of orders from the circuit court, including the denial of its motion for summary judgment and a decree of foreclosure.
The dispute began when Central Pacific Bank filed a motion for summary judgment against the Alcos family, seeking to enforce its rights related to a mortgage. The circuit court issued several orders, including one on May 31, 2023, denying the bank’s motion and another on April 22, 2025, denying its motion for reconsideration. Frustrated with the court's decisions, the bank attempted to appeal these orders.
However, the court ruled that the orders Central Pacific Bank sought to appeal were not final and therefore not appealable. Chief Judge Karen T. Nakasone, along with Associate Judges Keith K. Hiraoka and Clyde J. Wadsworth, stated, "The Orders are interlocutory and not appealable... the circuit court has not entered an appealable judgment." This means that the bank cannot appeal until a final judgment is entered in the case.
The court further explained that the orders did not qualify as collateral orders, which could be appealed separately from the main case. The judges noted that the issues raised in the bank's appeal were not completely separate from the merits of the action, and thus, they would be reviewable only after a final judgment is made. The court also mentioned that a temporary remand was not appropriate in this situation.
This ruling emphasizes the procedural requirements for appeals in Hawaii. It highlights that parties must wait for a final judgment before seeking to appeal interlocutory orders, which are typically not immediately appealable. The court's decision aligns with previous rulings, reinforcing the need for a clear and final resolution of disputes before they can be challenged in higher courts.
The dismissal of this appeal means that Central Pacific Bank must continue its legal battle in the lower court without the possibility of immediate review by the appellate court. This ruling could have significant implications for the bank and the Alcos family as they navigate the ongoing foreclosure proceedings.
Moving forward, Central Pacific Bank may still pursue its case in the lower court, but it cannot seek an appeal until a final judgment is issued. The outcome of the underlying foreclosure case remains uncertain, and the bank will need to prepare for further litigation.
As for the possibility of an appeal, Central Pacific Bank may choose to wait until the circuit court issues a final judgment before attempting to appeal again. Details were not available in the court filing regarding any related cases or future plans from the bank.