Oral Argument Before the Hawii Supreme Court
No. SCWC-11-0001104, Wednesday, October 2, 2013, 8:45 a.m.
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee on Behalf of the Holders of the Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust, Series NC 2005-HE8, Asset Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series NC 2005-HE8, Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. HERMINA CASTRO, STEVEN CASTRO, CHRISTOPHER CASTRO, and ESTEBAN CASTRO, Respondents/Defendants-Appellants.
The above-captioned case has been set for argument on the merits at:
Supreme Court Courtroom
Ali`iolani Hale, 2nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813
Attorneys for Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellee:
Charles R. Prather and Sofia Hirosane McGuire
Attorney for Respondents/Defendants-Appellants:
Robin R. Horner of RRH & Associates
NOTE: Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 07/26/13.
NOTE: Order rescheduling oral argument for 10/02/13 at 8:45 a.m., filed 09/24/13.
COURT: MER, CJ; PAN, SRA, SSM, & RWP, JJ.
Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellee U.S. Bank National Association (U.S. Bank) brought an ejectment action in the District Court of the Second Circuit (district court), against Defendants-Appellants Herminia Castro, Steven Castro, Christopher Castro, and Esteban Castro (collectively, “Defendants”). U.S. Bank claimed that it was the fee simple owner of the subject property pursuant to a non-judicial foreclosure sale and that Defendants continued to unlawfully occupy the property.
Herminia Castro filed a motion to dismiss U.S. Bank’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to District Court Rules of Civil Procedure (DCRCP) Rule 12.1, which provides that defendants may assert, as a defense to jurisdiction, that title to real estate will come into question. Herminia submitted a declaration asserting that she held title to the property by succession and that U.S. Bank did not hold title because the underlying loan transaction involving the property was void. Herminia further asserted that U.S. Bank lacked standing to foreclose on the property based on a break in the chain of title of the relevant loan documents.
In relevant part, the district court denied the motion to dismiss and entered a judgment for possession and writ of possession in favor of U.S. Bank. On appeal, the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) held that Herminia’s declaration contained sufficient information regarding the source, nature and extent of title claimed by Defendants as required by DCRCP Rule 12.1. The ICA vacated the district court’s judgment and order and remanded with instructions to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. In its application for writ of certiorari, U.S. Bank argues that the ICA erred in interpreting the requirements of DCRCP Rule 12.1 and that Herminia’s declaration did not sufficiently set forth the title claimed by Defendants.