Upon review of (1) Plaintiffs/Counterclaim-Defendants/ Appellants Roaring Lion, LLC, David Cowan, Nathalie Cowan, Umang P. Gupta, Ruth M. Gupta, and Pauoa Beach 8 LLC's (the Appellants), appeal from the Honorable Greg K. Nakamura's May 11, 2011 "Order Granting in Part Defendants Exclusive Resorts PBL1, LLC and Exclusive Resorts PBL3, LLC's Motion for Attorneys' Fees, Filed on December 13, 2010" (the May 11, 2011 order awarding attorneys' fees and costs), and (2) the record, it appears that we lack jurisdiction over Appeal No. CAAP-11-0000459 because, in the absence of an appealable final judgment, the May 11, 2011 order awarding attorneys' fees and costs is an interlocutory order that is not yet eligible for appellate review. Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 641-1(a) authorizes appeals from final judgments, orders, or decrees. Appeals under HRS § 641-1 "shall be taken in the manner . . . provided by the rules of court." HRS § 641-1(c). Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure (HRCP), "[e]very judgment shall be set forth on a separate document." Based on this requirement under HRCP Rule 58, the Supreme Court of Hawaii has held that "[a]n appeal may be taken . . . only after the orders have been reduced to a judgment and the judgment has been entered in favor of and against the appropriate parties pursuant to HRCP [Rule] 58[.]" Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Hawaii 115, 119, 869 P.2d 1334, 1338 (1994). Although the circuit court has entered a December 1, 2010 judgment in this case, we have dismissed two prior appeals from the December 1, 2010 judgment in Appeal Nos. CAAP-10-0000249 and CAAP-10-0000251 because the December 1, 2010 judgment does not satisfy requirements for an appealable judgment in a multiple-claim case under HRCP Rule 58 and the holding in Jenkins. "Absent entry of an appealable final judgment on the claims . . . [to which an award of attorneys' fees and costs relates], the award of attorneys' fees and costs is . . . not appealable." Fujimoto v. Au, 95 Hawaii 116, 123, 19 P.3d 699, 706 (2001); CRSC, Inc. v. Sage Diamond Co., Inc., 95 Hawaii 301, 306, 22 P.3d 97, 102 (App. 2001) ("Similarly, the September 23, 1999 Order [awarding only attorneys' fees] and the February 3, 2000 Judgment [awarding only attorneys' fees] are not appealable, and we do not have appellate jurisdiction to review them."). In the absence of an appealable final judgment, the May 11, 2011 order awarding attorneys' fees and costs is an interlocutory order that is not yet eligible for appellate review, and, consequently, we lack jurisdiction over Appeal No. CAAP-11-0000459. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.