Ass'n of Condo. Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele v. Sakuma

6 Citing cases

  1. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Amasol

    135 Haw. 357 (Haw. 2015)   Cited 2 times

    Petitioners/Defendants–Appellants Ronald Pajela Amasol and Jean Louise Morales Amasol (collectively, "the Amasols") seek review of the November 20, 2013 "Order Dismissing Appeal for Lack of Appellate Jurisdiction" ("Dismissal Order") issued by the Intermediate Court of Appeals ("ICA"). In light of our decision in Association of Condominium Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele v. Sakuma, 131 Hawai‘i 254, 318 P.3d 94 (2013), which was issued about one month after the Dismissal Order, we hold that the ICA erred in dismissing as untimely the Amasols' appeal from the December 31, 2012 order denying their April 16, 2012 motion for reconsideration and the decisions for which reconsideration had been sought. Clarifying our opinion in Sakuma, however, we also hold that the ICA did not err in dismissing as premature any attempted appeal of the Amasols' July 13, 2012 amended reconsideration motion, because the circuit court has not entered an order disposing of that motion.

  2. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Amasol

    SCWC-13-0000040 (Haw. Apr. 14, 2015)

    Petitioners/Defendants-Appellants Ronald Pajela Amasol and Jean Louise Morales Amasol (collectively, "the Amasols") seek review of the November 20, 2013 Order Dismissing Appeal for Lack of Appellate Jurisdiction" ("Dismissal Order") issued by the Intermediate Court of Appeals ("ICA"). In light of our decision in Association of Condominium Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele v. Sakuma, 131 Hawai'i 254, 318 P.3d 94 (2013), which was issued about one month after the Dismissal Order, we hold that the ICA erred in dismissing as untimely the Amasols' appeal from the December 31, 2012 order denying their April 16, 2012 motion for reconsideration and the decisions for which reconsideration had been sought. Clarifying our opinion in Sakuma, however, we also hold that the ICA did not err in dismissing as premature any attempted appeal of the Amasols' July 13, 2012 amended reconsideration motion, because the circuit court has not entered an order disposing of that motion.

  3. Ass'n of Condo. Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele v. Sakuma

    SCWC-12-0000870 (Haw. Nov. 6, 2015)

    ()On September 28, 2015, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Patsy Naomi Sakuma (Sakuma) filed an application for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the Intermediate Court of Appeals' (ICA) September 23, 2015 judgment on appeal. Although it is understandable that the ICA presumed it had jurisdiction and addressed Sakuma's appeal after the majority's opinion in Ass'n of Condo. Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele ex rel. Bd. of Dirs. v. Sakuma, 131 Hawai'i 254, 318 P.3d 94 (2013) was issued, our recent decision in Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Amasol, 135 Hawai'i 357, 351 P.3d 584 (2015) clarified that the ICA did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Therefore,

  4. King v. Elkayam

    NO. CAAP-16-0000209 (Haw. Ct. App. Jul. 13, 2016)   Cited 2 times

    The Supreme Court of Hawai'i has also held that "when a timely post-judgment tolling motions is deemed denied, it does not trigger the thirty-day deadline for filing a notice of appeal until entry of the judgment or appealable order pursuant to HRAP Rules (a)(1) and 4(a)(3)." Association of Condominium Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele v. Sakuma, 131 Hawai'i 254, 256, 318 P.3d 94, 96 (2013). Under the holding in Sakuma, the event that triggered the thirty-day time period under HRAP Rule 4(a)(3) for filing a notice of appeal from the September 1, 2015 judgment on the decree of foreclosure was the circuit court's entry of the February 17, 2016 post-judgment order denying the Elkayam Appellants' September 11, 2015 post-judgment HRCP Rule 59 motion for reconsideration.

  5. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Rosana

    353 P.3d 412 (Haw. Ct. App. 2015)

    The two HRCP Rule 60(b) motions were filed on May 29 and June 12, 2012, more than ten days after the April 23, 2012 judgment, and thus cannot be considered as tolling motions under Hawai‘i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 4(a)(3). See Ass'n of Condo. Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele ex rel. Bd. of Directors v. Sakuma, 131 Hawai‘i 254, 256, 318 P.3d 94, 96 (2013) (“Under HRAP Rule 4(a)(3), a timely post-judgment motion tolls the time to file a notice of appeal until thirty days after the entry of an order disposing of the motion.”) (emphasis added); Lambert v. Lua, 92 Hawai‘i 228, 234, 990 P.2d 126, 132 (App.1999) (“An HRCP Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment may toll the period for appealing a judgment or order ... if the motion is served and filed within ten (10) days after the judgment is entered.”) (citation omitted).

  6. Springleaf Fin. Servs. of Haw., Inc. v. Thomas

    NO. CAAP-14-0001189 (Haw. Ct. App. Dec. 29, 2014)

    Nevertheless, "when a timely post-judgment tolling motion is deemed denied, it does not trigger the thirty-day deadline for filing a notice of appeal until entry of the judgment or appealable order pursuant to HRAP Rules 4(a)(1) and 4(a)(3)." Association of Condominium Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele v. Sakuma, 131 Hawai'i 254, 256, 318 P.3d 94, 96 (2013). Consequently, "the time for filing the notice of appeal is extended until 30 days after entry of an order disposing of the motion[.