Background
This case arose from a foreclosure dispute between The Bank of New York Mellon, acting as trustee for a 2006-era mortgage pass-through certificate trust, and the Association of Apartment Owners (AOAO) of Palm Villas II, a Hawaii condominium association. The underlying litigation, filed in the First Circuit Court, also involved borrowers Pancho Deleon Abalos and Cassie Lei Almanzor Abalos, as well as HawaiiUSA Federal Credit Union and Ewa by Gentry Community Association as additional defendants.
The Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) issued a decision in the matter under docket CAAP-23-0000402. Dissatisfied with that outcome, The Bank of New York Mellon filed an Application for Writ of Certiorari with the Hawaii Supreme Court on May 15, 2026, seeking further review.
The precise rulings of the lower courts are not detailed in this order, as the Supreme Court’s action is limited to a rejection of the certiorari application without opinion.
The Court’s Holding
The Hawaii Supreme Court, composed of Chief Justice Devens, Justices McKenna, Eddins, and Ginoza, and Circuit Judge Tomasa sitting by assignment, unanimously rejected The Bank of New York Mellon’s Application for Writ of Certiorari. The order, issued on July 7, 2026, contains no written analysis or explanation — certiorari rejection orders in Hawaii typically issue without elaboration.
By rejecting the application, the Supreme Court declined to disturb the ICA’s decision, leaving that ruling as the final appellate word on the matter. The rejection is not a ruling on the merits of the underlying foreclosure dispute but rather a determination that the case did not warrant further review by the high court.
Key Takeaways
- The Hawaii Supreme Court rejected without explanation The Bank of New York Mellon’s petition for certiorari, ending appellate review of the underlying foreclosure dispute.
- The ICA’s decision in CAAP-23-0000402 stands as the final appellate ruling.
- The case involves competing interests among a mortgage securitization trustee, a condominium owners association, individual borrowers, and other lienholders — a fact pattern common in Hawaii nonjudicial and judicial foreclosure litigation.
Why It Matters
Disputes between mortgage trustees and condominium associations in Hawaii have long centered on the priority of association liens under Hawaii’s condominium property regime statutes. Although the substance of the ICA’s ruling is not disclosed in this order, the Supreme Court’s refusal to grant certiorari signals it found no reason to revisit the ICA’s resolution of those issues in this case.
For lenders and servicers holding securitized mortgage loans on Hawaii condominiums, the rejection serves as a reminder that the ICA remains the practical court of last resort in many foreclosure cases, and that obtaining Hawaii Supreme Court review is discretionary and far from guaranteed.