 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Amantiad v. Odum5/20/1999
1997, Amantiad moved pursuant to HRCP Rule 60(b) to vacate the circuit court's order granting OTS's motion to enforce settlement. In his written pleadings, Amantiad argued in support of his Rule 60(b) motion that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction, because: (1) the Director of Labor retains original jurisdiction, pursuant HRS § 386-73 (1993), over a waiver or wash of future workers' compensation benefits; and (2) the matter was dismissed with prejudice and no appeal was taken. On December 16, 1997, the circuit court denied Amantiad's motion to vacate the August 26, 1997 order. Amantiad timely appealed.
II. DISCUSSION
A. The Circuit Court Lacked Subject Matter Jurisdiction to Hear OTS's Motion to Enforce Settlement After all Parties Stipulated to Dismiss all Claims and Parties with Prejudice.
1. Standard of Review
An appellate court reviews a circuit court's determination of an HRCP Rule 60 motion for an abuse of discretion. See Island Ins. Co., Inc. v. Santos, 86 Hawaii 363, 366, 949 P.2d 206, 206 (App. 1997) (citing Richardson v. Lane, 6 Haw. App. 614, 622, 736 P.2d 63, 69, cert. denied, 484 U.S. 953 (1987), reh'g denied, 484 U.S. 1039 (1988)).
"The existence of jurisdiction is a question of law that we review de novo under the right/wrong standard." Lester v. Rapp, 85 Hawaii 238, 241, 942 P.2d 502, 505 (1997) (quoting State ex. rel. Bronster v. Yoshina, 84 Hawaii 179, 183, 932 P.2d 316, 320 (1997)); see also State v. Ontiveros, 82 Hawaii 446, 448, 923 P.2d 388, 390 (1996) (citation omitted). Questions regarding subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of a cause of action. See Waikiki Marketplace Inv. Co. v. Chair of Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the City and County of Honolulu, 86 Hawaii 343, 348, 949 P.2d 183, 188 (App. 1997) (citing Wong v. Wong, 79 Hawaii 26, 29, 897 P.2d 953, 956 (1995)). When reviewing a case where the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, the appellate court retains jurisdiction, not on the merits, but for the purpose of correcting the error in jurisdiction. See id. A judgment rendered by a circuit court without subject matter jurisdiction is void. See id.
2. When OTS Filed Its Motion to Enforce Settlement, the Circuit Court Lacked Subject Matter Jurisdiction.
The dispositive issue in the instant appeal is whether the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to enforce an oral settlement, entered on the record before the circuit court, after all parties stipulated to dismiss with prejudice all claims and parties. Based upon the following, we hold that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction.
In Gilmartin v. Abastillas, 10 Haw. App. 283, 869 P.2d 1346 (1994), the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) addressed a substantially similar issue. Gilmartin involved an action for specific performance on an option to purchase a condominium unit. Just before trial, the parties negotiated a settlement agreement and read its terms into the record. Approximately one month later, they executed a release and settlement agreement that was neither approved by the circuit court nor incorporated into their stipulated dismissal. The parties stipulated to dismiss the matter with prejudice. A disagreement thereafter arose with respect to unpaid lease rent, interest, and maintenance fees; however, in order to complete the closing on the condominium unit, the parties agreed to settle the issue at a later date and to set aside a sum of money in escrow to cover the disputed sum. After further disagreement, Gilmartin moved the circuit court to enforce the specific terms of the settlement agreement and to award her the remaining escrow funds, plus attorneys' fees and costs. The circuit court summarily
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Hawaii Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|