Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bank of America, N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo

Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawaii

July 21, 2017

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP FKA COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
GRISEL REYES-TOLEDO, Defendant-Appellant, and WAI KALOI AT MAKAKILO COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, MAKAKILO COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, and PALEHUA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, Defendants-Appellees and JOHN DOES 1-50, JANE DOES 1-50, DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-50, DOE CORPORATIONS 1-50, DOE ENTITIES 1-50, and DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS 1-50, Defendants

         APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CIVIL NO. 12-1-0668)

          R. Steven Geshell, for Defendant-Appellant.

          David B. Rosen, Zachary K. Kondo, David E. McAllister, Lloyd T. Workman, Justin S. Moyer, (Aldridge Pite LLP), for Plaintiff-Appellee.

          Nakamura, Chief Judge, Leonard and Ginoza, JJ.

          SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER

         Defendant-Appellant Grisel Reyes-Toledo (Reyes-Toledo) appeals from the December 9, 2014 Judgment (Judgment) entered in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Bank of America, N.A., Successor by Merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, fka Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP (BOA), by the Circuit Court of the First Circuit (Circuit Court)-[1] The Hawai'i Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) affirmed the Judgment, but concluded that it did not have appellate jurisdiction over (1) the Circuit Court's February 12, 2013 order granting BOA's motion to dismiss Reyes-Toledo's counterclaims (Dismissal Order), or (2) the Circuit Court's December 31, 2013 order denying reconsideration of the Dismissal Order (Order Denying Reconsideration). Bank of America, N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo, No. CAAP-15-0000005, 2016 WL 1092305 (Haw. App. Mar. 16, 2016) (SDO). On grant of certiorari, the Hawai'i Supreme Court vacated the ICA's Judgment on Appeal and, inter alia, remanded the case to the ICA for a determination of whether the Circuit Court erred in dismissing Reyes-Toledo's counterclaims. Bank of America, N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo, 139 Hawai'i 361, 390 P.3d 1248 (2017).

         Reyes-Toledo, in her remaining points of error (E & F), contends that the Circuit Court reversibly erred (1) when it entered the Dismissal Order, which dismissed her counterclaims for wrongful foreclosure, declaratory judgment, quiet title, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices (UDAP), pursuant to Hawai'i Rules of Civil Procedure (HRCP) Rule 12(b)(6), and (2) when it entered the Order Denying Reconsideration.

         Upon careful review of the record and the briefs submitted by the parties, and having given due consideration to the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties, we resolve Reyes-Toledo's remaining points of error as follows:

         Pursuant to HRCP Rule 8(a), a "pleading which sets forth a claim for relief, whether an original claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (2) a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks." Moreover, the pleading "must contain either direct allegations on every material point necessary to sustain a recovery on any legal theory, even though it may not be the theory suggested or intended by the pleader, or contain allegations from which an inference fairly may be drawn that evidence on these material points will be introduced at trial." Marsland v. Pang, 5 Haw.App. 463, 475, 701 P.2d 175, 186 (1985) (citation omitted).

         A pleading may be dismissed under HRCP Rule 12(b)(6)[2]for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. However, it is well recognized that:

[a] complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his or her claim that would entitle him or her to relief. We must therefore view a plaintiff's complaint in a light most favorable to him or her in order to determine whether the allegations contained therein could warrant relief under any alternative theory. For this reason, in reviewing a circuit court's order dismissing a complaint our consideration is strictly limited to the allegations of the complaint, and we must deem those allegations to be true.

In re Estate of Rogers, 103 Hawai'i 275, 280-81, 81 P.3d 1190, 1195-96 (2003) (citations, brackets, and ellipsis omitted). Furthermore,

[w]hile a complaint attacked by [an HRCP] Rule 12(b) (6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff's obligation to provide the "grounds" of his "entitlement to relief" reguires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level on the assumption that all of the complaint's allegations are true (even if doubtful in fact).

Pavsek v. Sandvold, 127 Hawai'i 390, 403, 279 P.3d 55, 68 (App. 2012) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)) .

         1. Wrongful Foreclosure

         In her Counterclaim, Reyes-Toledo alleges that BOA's conduct in commencing the foreclosure was willful, malicious, and without just cause. Reyes-Toledo did not otherwise identify any specific acts committed by BOA that would make the foreclosure wrongful.

         The supreme court recently recognized certain potential claims for wrongful foreclosure in Hungate v. Law Office of David B. Rosen, 139 Hawai'i 394, 407, 391 P.3d 1, 14 (2017) . In Hungate, the supreme court articulated that "creating a cause of action [against a foreclosing mortgagee's attorney] under former HRS § 667-5[3] is not necessary to protect the interests of the mortgagor" as "the mortgagor can protect its interest through filing a claim against the mortgagee for wrongful foreclosure." Hungate, 139 Hawai'i at 407, 391 P.3d at 14; see also Santiago v. Tanaka, 137 Hawai'i 137, 158-59, 366 P.3d 612, 633-34 (2016) (recognizing that the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.