Hipawai Corporation v. Mathews

• Court: Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
• Decided: September 8, 2025
• Docket: CAAP-23-0000449
• Status: Published

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 08-SEP-2025 08:33 AM Dkt. 71 SO

NOS. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, and CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

HIPAWAI CORPORATION, a Hawaii corporation, as Successor Trustee under that certain unrecorded Declaration of Trust dated November 13, 1968; KENNETH L. CHUN, CAROL A. CHUN, and SUSAN D. CHUN, as Successor Trustees under that certain unrecorded Alma K. Leong Revocable Living Trust Agreement dated September 28, 1993; and PEARL CORPORATION, a Hawaii corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. TINA CHERIE MATHEWS, Defendant/Cross-claim Defendant-Appellant, and ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF 965 PROSPECT, a Hawaii nonprofit corporation, Defendant/Cross-claimant-Appellee, and DOE DEFENDANTS 1-10, Defendants.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CIVIL NOS. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX and 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, McCullen and Guidry, JJ.)

Defendant/Cross-claim Defendant-Appellant Tina Cherie

Mathews appeals from the Circuit Court of the First Circuit's

June 27, 2023 and September 18, 2023 Hawai‘i Rules of Civil NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Procedure (HRCP) Rule 54(b) judgments in 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX and

November 27, 2023 HRCP Rule 54(b) judgment in 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX. 1

All judgments were entered in favor of Plaintiffs-Appellees

Hipawai Corporation, a Hawaii corporation, as Successor Trustee

under that certain unrecorded Declaration of Trust dated

November 13, 1968; Kenneth L. Chun, Carol A. Chun, and Susan D.

Chun, as Successor Trustees under that certain unrecorded

Alma K. Leong Revocable Living Trust Agreement dated

September 28, 1993; and Pearl Corporation, a Hawaii corporation

(collectively, Hipawai).

On appeal, Mathews challenges the award of attorneys'

fees.

Upon careful review of the record and the briefs

submitted by the parties and having given due consideration to

the issues raised and the arguments advanced, we resolve this

appeal as discussed below, and affirm.

Mathews contends the circuit court "erred in awarding

attorneys' fees for the hours of work in the bankruptcy case and

corresponding work in the circuit courts because this work was

the result of sloppy work by Hipawai's attorneys for which [she]

was in no way responsible." (Formatting altered.) Mathews

1 The Honorable Dean E. Ochiai presided over 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX and the Honorable Jeffrey P. Crabtree presided over 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX. Mathews' appeals from these judgments created three appellate cases, which this court consolidated.

2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

argues the work should have been done by an associate rather

than a partner and Hipawai was at fault for drafting an order

with conflicting language.

We review an award of attorneys' fees for an abuse of

discretion. Queen Emma Found. v. Tatibouet, 123 Hawai‘i 500,

506, 236 P.3d 1236, 1242 (App. 2010).

Mathews held the lease for two apartments in the same

building, units 401 and 601. Mathews stopped making monthly

payments on both units and failed to cure the delinquency.

Hipawai filed a complaint to terminate the lease and foreclose

junior liens on each unit. 2 Hipawai then moved for summary

judgment and an interlocutory decree of foreclosure on each

unit, which was granted.

In its order granting summary judgment and an

interlocutory decree of foreclosure, the circuit court ordered

the "interest of Mathews in and under the Lease is hereby

cancelled, terminated and foreclosed" and further ordered that

"Mathews has no remaining right, title, or interest in the

Property[.]" The circuit court entered an HRCP Rule 54(b)

judgment in both cases. Mathews did not appeal from these

judgments.

2 The complaint in 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX was related to the unit 401 lease and the complaint in 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX was related to the unit 601 lease.

3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

About four months after the circuit court terminated

Mathews' interest in units 401 and 601, Mathews filed for

bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the

District of Hawai‘i. In response to the bankruptcy form

question, "Do you own or have any legal or equitable interest in

any residence, building, land, or similar property?", Mathews

checked "Yes" and listed units 401 and 601. The bankruptcy

proceedings caused a stay in the circuit court proceedings

underlying this appeal.

According to Hipawai, it moved the bankruptcy court

for relief from the stay because units 401 and 601 were not part

of Mathews' bankruptcy estate since the circuit court terminated

Mathews' interests in both units. The bankruptcy court

permitted Hipawai to seek clarification from the circuit court

as it perceived possible ambiguity in the circuit court's

summary judgment order.

In response to Hipawai's request for clarification,

the circuit court explained it "unambiguously terminated the

interest of Mathews in the leasehold" of units 401 and 601, "and

that Mathews had no remaining right, title, or interest in the

Property whatsoever[.]"

When awarding attorneys' fees in 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX, the

circuit court found the billing rate was "reasonable in light of

his experience and skill" and the work was "reasonable and

4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

necessary in light of the extraordinary amount of work that had

to go into this particular matter[.]" And, in 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX

the circuit court determined the fees were reasonable and did

not appear "overbilled" even though the rates and amount of time

were "sort of on the higher end of the spectrum."

Regarding Mathews' argument that an associate rather

than a partner should have litigated the underlying cases, she

provides no authority to expressly support this proposition.

Here, Hipawai had to navigate state lease termination/

foreclosure proceedings and federal bankruptcy proceedings to

assert its claims and defend its interests in the units. We see

no reason this type of litigation should arbitrarily be limited

to associates.

Turning to Mathews' argument that Hipawai's "sloppy

work" created a conflict, she points to Paragraph 13 of the

circuit court's order, which noted all persons would be

permanently barred from claiming any rights in the property upon

the closing of the sale:

13. All Defendants, including Mathews, and all other parties hereto, and all persons claiming by, through or under them, . . . will be perpetually barred of and from any and all rights, title, and interest in the Property or any part thereof, upon closing of the sale herein authorized.

Mathews asserts that Paragraph 13 conflicts with the circuit

court's order terminating her lease and interest in the units.

5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

This language did not conflict with the circuit

court's order that the "interest of Mathews in and under the

Lease is hereby cancelled, terminated and foreclosed" and

Property[.]" Paragraph 13 provided that, upon the sale of units

401 and 601, all persons would be barred from "claiming" any

rights to units 401 and 601. Paragraph 13 did not indicate a

right to units 401 and 601 actually exists.

The record does not support Mathews' claim that

Hipawai's "sloppy work" in the state proceedings resulted in

high fees and that she "was in no way responsible" for the

bankruptcy proceeding and related state court litigation. Thus,

we cannot say the circuit court abused its discretion in

awarding attorneys' fees.

Based on the foregoing, we affirm the circuit court's

June 27, 2023 and September 18, 2023 judgments in 1CCV-20-

0001229, and November 27, 2023 judgment in 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, September 8, 2025.

On the briefs: /s/ Katherine G. Leonard Presiding Judge Earle A. Partington, for Defendant-Appellant. /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen Associate Judge Kelly G. LaPorte, Katherine E. Bruce, /s/ Kimberly T. Guidry (Cades Schutte), Associate Judge for Plaintiffs-Appellees.