MTGLQ Investors, L.P. v. Association of Apartment Owners of Elima Lani Condominiums

526 P.3d 963, 153 Haw. 125
CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedApril 4, 2023
DocketSCWC-19-0000522
StatusPublished

This text of 526 P.3d 963 (MTGLQ Investors, L.P. v. Association of Apartment Owners of Elima Lani Condominiums) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
MTGLQ Investors, L.P. v. Association of Apartment Owners of Elima Lani Condominiums, 526 P.3d 963, 153 Haw. 125 (haw 2023).

Opinion

***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX 04-APR-2023 07:53 AM Dkt. 36 SO

SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX and SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

MTGLQ INVESTORS, L.P., Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF ELIMA LANI CONDOMINIUMS, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant,

and

NOAH HENRY CLIFFORD; THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, formerly known as THE BANK OF NEW YORK, as Successor Trustee to JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., as Trustee on behalf of THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWEHQ, INC., CWHEQ REVOLVING HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST, SERIES 2005-F; and WAIKOLOA VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.

CERTIORARI FROM THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX; CASE NO. 3CC17100299K)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Eddins, JJ., and Wilson, J., assigned by reason of vacancy1)

1 See Order of Designation filed on March 29, 2023, in SCMF-XX-XXXXXXX. ***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***

I. INTRODUCTION

This case is brought by Association of Apartment

Owners of Elima Lani Condominiums (AOAO), the same condominium

association that brought suit in Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v.

AOAO, No. SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX, 2023 WL 2519855 (Haw. Mar. 15, 2023).

The facts of this case are similar to Nationstar, and as set

forth below, we reach the same result here.

II. BACKGROUND

After recording a notice of default and intention to

foreclose on the property’s owner for unpaid assessments and

costs, AOAO acquired the property by quitclaim deed filed

July 27, 2015 after a non-judicial foreclosure sale. On

September 27, 2017, MTGLQ Investors, L.P. (MTGLQ) filed a

complaint in the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit for

foreclosure of the property. In response, AOAO denied that its

interest was junior to MTGLQ’s and alleged that the original

property owner owed it $35,079.61 in delinquent assessments as

of July 27, 2015.

On October 29, 2018, MTGLQ moved for summary judgment

and an interlocutory decree of foreclosure. It asked that a

commissioner be appointed to take possession of the property,

rent it out, and sell it. AOAO objected to MTGLQ’s request for

possession and rents. It argued that Hawai͑i Revised Statutes

2 ***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***

(HRS) § 514B-146(n) (Supp. 2015) referenced “any excess rental

income received by the association” after a bank foreclosure,

which meant the statute “clearly contemplated and accepted” that

the association would continue in possession and collect rents.2

On June 17, 2019, the court granted summary judgment in favor of

MTGLQ and an interlocutory decree of foreclosure, and appointed

2 HRS § 514B-146(n) was numbered as HRS § 514B-146(k) before the statute was renumbered in 2018, and it is referred to as HRS § 514B-146(k) in the briefing. See 2018 Haw. Sess. Laws Act 195, § 4 at 672. Because there was no change to the substance of the statute, we refer to the current numbering, HRS § 514B-146(n), throughout. See id. HRS § 514B-146(n) provides:

After any judicial or nonjudicial foreclosure proceeding in which the association acquires title to the unit, any excess rental income received by the association from the unit shall be paid to existing lien holders based on the priority of lien, and not on a pro rata basis, and shall be applied to the benefit of the unit owner. For purposes of this subsection, excess rental income shall be any net income received by the association after a court has issued a final judgment determining the priority of a senior mortgagee and after paying, crediting, or reimbursing the association or a third party for: (1) The lien for delinquent assessments pursuant to subsections (a) and (b); (2) Any maintenance fee delinquency against the unit; (3) Attorney’s fees and other collection costs related to the association’s foreclosure of the unit; or (4) Any costs incurred by the association for the rental, repair, maintenance, or rehabilitation of the unit while the association is in possession of the unit including monthly association maintenance fees, management fees, real estate commissions, cleaning and repair expenses for the unit, and general excise taxes paid on rental income; provided that the lien for delinquent assessments under paragraph (1) shall be paid, credited, or reimbursed first.

3 ***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***

a commissioner to take possession and collect rents.3 AOAO filed

a timely notice of appeal.

In a report dated January 21, 2020, the Commissioner

stated that he had conducted a public auction of the property

and recommended the court confirm the sale. He attested that he

had collected $3,275.00 in total rents for the months of August,

September, and October 2019, and that the tenant had vacated on

November 1. The court confirmed the sale and awarded the rent

to MTGLQ on June 12, 2020. AOAO filed another timely notice of

appeal from this judgment.

The ICA consolidated both of AOAO’s appeals for

disposition, and affirmed both the interlocutory decree of

foreclosure and the judgment confirming the sale. It found that

the circuit court’s order that the Commissioner should possess,

rent, and sell the property was not in error because AOAO’s

rights in the property were foreclosed by the foreclosure

judgment. The ICA then rejected AOAO’s interpretation of HRS

§ 514B-146(n), quoting its holding in Bank of N.Y. Mellon v.

Larrua that the statute addresses “how an AOAO must utilize any

rental income it receives” but it “does not, however, necessarily

entitle an AOAO to receive such rental income” following a

3 The Honorable Melvin H. Fujino presided.

4 ***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***

mortgagee’s foreclosure. 150 Hawai‘i 429, 443—44, 504 P.3d 1017,

1031—32 (App. 2022).

III. DISCUSSION

This case raises the same two questions of law as

Nationstar: (1) whether, under our precedents, a foreclosed

owner (in this case, the association) is entitled to exclusive

possession and rents after the entry of summary judgment and an

interlocutory decree of foreclosure, but prior to the

confirmation of sale; and (2) if not, whether HRS § 514B-146(n)

entitles the association to rents accruing during this period,

or some portion of them. Nationstar, 2023 WL 2519855, at *5.

With respect to the first question, we hold here, as

in Nationstar, that AOAO’s right to rents and possession was

terminated by the foreclosure judgment. See id. Unless

provided otherwise by statute, AOAO was not entitled to rent or

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Wise.
304 P.3d 1192 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
526 P.3d 963, 153 Haw. 125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mtglq-investors-lp-v-association-of-apartment-owners-of-elima-lani-haw-2023.