Lambert v. Teisina.Â, 131 Haw. 457

The Lambert family sought partition of two adjacent Laie parcels (Parcel 33 and a Kuleana parcel); a commissioner was appointed to sell the property at public auction after a summary judgment ordering partition.
The Teisinas occupied a ~10,000 sq. ft. portion of Parcel 33 and built a home there; the court found the Teisinas had a small fractional legal interest (3/5824) but allowed the home to be included in the sale.
At auction Trustee Lambert successfully purchased Parcel 33 for $425,000 (excluding the Teisinas’ house); the court’s Confirmation Order allocated $150,000 of the purchase price to the value of the Teisinas’ house and ordered disbursements and surrender of the house within a set period.
No separate final judgment resolving all claims was entered as to Parcel 33 when the Teisinas appealed the Confirmation Order to the ICA.
The ICA dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because HRCP Rule 58 required a separate final judgment; the Teisinas sought certiorari to the Hawai‘i Supreme Court arguing the Confirmation Order was appealable under the Forgay doctrine (hardship/irreparable injury exception).
The Hawai‘i Supreme Court held the Confirmation Order was appealable under the Forgay doctrine, vacated the ICA’s dismissal, and remanded for disposition on the merits.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether an order confirming a partition sale and directing distribution is appealable in the absence of a separate final judgment	Lambert: No final judgment was entered; the Confirmation Order is not appealable and Forgay does not apply; allowing appeal would undermine final-judgment rule and encourage piecemeal appeals	Teisinas: Forgay doctrine applies because the Confirmation Order effectively terminates property rights and will inflict irreparable harm if appellate review is delayed	The Confirmation Order is appealable under the Forgay (hardship/irreparable injury) doctrine; ICA’s dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is vacated and appeal remanded

Forgay v. Conrad, 47 U.S. 201 (1848) (establishes hardship/irreparable-injury exception permitting appeal from orders directing immediate transfer of property)
Ciesla v. Reddish, 78 Hawaii 18, 889 P.2d 702 (1995) (discusses Forgay exception in Hawaii and its narrow scope)
Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawai`i 115, 869 P.2d 1334 (1994) (HRCP Rule 58 requires separate judgment before appeal absent an exception)
Sekaquaptewa v. MacDonald, 575 F.2d 239 (9th Cir. 1978) (applied Forgay to a partition judgment that effectively deprived parties of possession and held it sufficiently final for appeal)
International Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Woods, 69 Haw. 11, 731 P.2d 151 (1987) (foreclosure decree ordering sale held appealable under Forgay due to irreparable injury)
Waimanalo Village Residents’ Corp. v. Young, 87 Hawai`i 353, 956 P.2d 1285 (1998) (judgment for possession accompanied by writ of possession held appealable under Forgay)