Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Supreme Court of the Marshall Islands

Lemari v Bank of Guam [1992] MHSC 16; 1 MILR (Rev) 299 (17 December 1992)

1 MILR (Rev.) 299

IN THE SUPREME COURT
REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS

S.Ct. Civil No. 92-03
(High Ct. Civil No. E-1992-011)

LEMARI, et al.,
Plaintiff-Appellants,

-v-

BANK OF GUAM,
Defendant-Appellee.

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

DECEMBER 17, 1992

ASHFORD, C.J.

SUMMARY:

The High Court denied Appellant's motion for a jury trial and certain oral rulings. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal since the orders appealed from were interlocutory and not final and appealable.

DIGEST:

1. APPEAL AND ERROR – Decisions Reviewable – Finality of Determination: A final judgment or order is one that disposes of the case, whether before or after trial. After such an order or judgment, there is nothing further for the trial court to do with respect to the merits and relief requested.

2. APPEAL AND ERROR – Same – Same: The Constitution, statutes, rules and case law in this jurisdiction establish that only a final adjudication, however styled, can be appealed. Article VI, Section 2(2) of the Constitution states that appeals lie to the Supreme Court only from "final decision(s)."

3. APPEAL AND ERROR – Same – Same: The Supreme Court has consistently held that appeals from interlocutory orders will not be entertained.

The Notice of Appeal in this matter stated that it was "from that certain Order entered in this action on the 14th day of October, 1992 and those various oral rulings made in the hearing on the 12th of October, 1992."

There may be circumstances in which this Court would consider an oral ruling to be final and appealable, but they would be exceptional. Among other reasons, courts do not entertain appeals from oral rulings because of the lack of certainty as to the precise language of the rulings and the fact that until written, signed and filed, they are always subject to change and, ordinarily, do not take effect.

The Order filed October 14, 1992 denied Plaintiffs' demand for a jury trial and struck that demand from the Complaint. In response to an Order of this Court, the parties filed memoranda addressing the question whether the October 14 Order is a final judgment or order appealable as of right. This Court has concluded that it is not.

[1] The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "(n)o self-enforcing formula defining when a judgment is 'final' can be devised." Republic Natural Gas v. Oklahoma, [1948] USSC 61; 334 U.S. 62, 67[1948] USSC 61; , 92 L.Ed. 1212, 1219 (1947). It has also recognized that the considerations that determine finality must take into account the interest of the court in maintaining the smooth functioning of the judicial system as well as the interests of the parties. Id. at 69, 92 L.Ed. at 1220. In general terms, however, a final judgment or order is one that disposes of the case, whether before or after trial. After such an order or judgment, there is nothing further for the trial court to do with respect to the merits and relief requested. The Order of October 12, 1992, was not a final order disposing of the case because it remains to be tried or otherwise be determined by the Court.

Appellants have urged this Court to acknowledge the policy underlying and to subscribe to the conditions under which interlocutory appeals may be taken to United States courts of appeal under the provisions of 28 USC 1292. Paragraph (a) of that statute expressly confers jurisdiction on courts of appeal to hear appeals from interlocutory decisions involving injunctions, receiverships and admiralty jurisdiction. Paragraph (b) of that statute permits a court of appeal, in its discretion, to accept an interlocutory appeal when an order is certified by the trial judge to involve "a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and ... an immediate appeal ... may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation."

[2] The Republic has no similar statute, however, nor any rule allowing interlocutory appeals. Further, all of the Constitution, statutes, rules and case law in this jurisdiction establish that only a final adjudication, however styled, can be appealed. Article VI, Section 2(2) of the Constitution states that appeals lie to the Supreme Court only from "final decision(s)." The Civil Procedure Act, 29 MIRC Ch. 1, Section 31, provides that appeals may be taken within 30 days after entry of "the judgment, order or decree appealed from." The Marshall Islands Appellate Rules of Procedure contemplate only appeals from judgments (Rules 3 and 4), but also recognize that the order, decree or other action of the court disposing of a case with finality is appealable (Rule 8), absent some statutory limitation on the right to appeal. As to the latter, see, for example, 29 MIRC Ch. 1, Section 32(1).

[3] Finally, this Court has consistently held that appeals from interlocutory orders will not be entertained. MIDC and Leon v. MALGOV and RepMar, 1 MILR (Rev.) 209 (Sep 10, 1990); Piamon v. Lanitur-Bulele, 1 MILR (Rev.) 129 (Jun 9, 1989); RepMar v. Balos, et al. (4), 1 MILR (Rev.) 133 (Jul 17, 1989).

The appeal is dismissed.