Skip to Main Nav Skip to Main Content Skip to Footer Content

Eviction moratorium on Maui Island ended on Feb. 4, 2025. For updates, click here.

Oral Argument Before the Intermediate Court of Appeals – CAAP-15-0000104

CAAP-15-0000104, Wednesday, August 15, 2018, 9 a.m.

In the Matter of the Trust Agreement dated June 6, 1974, as amended.

The above-captioned case was argued on the merits at:

Supreme Court Courtroom
Ali iolani Hale, 2nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813

Attorneys for Petitioner-Appellant Association of Apartment Owners of Discovery Bay:

Andrew V. Beaman, Danton Wong, Andrew W. Char, Adrienne S. Yoshihara, Nathaniel A. Higa (Chun Kerr)

Attorneys for Respondent-Appellee Bank of Hawaii, as Trustee:

Vincent A. Piekarski, Johnathan c. Bolton (Goodsill Anderson Quinn & Stifel)

Attorneys for Respondents-Appellees Susan Sheetz and Patricia Sheetz Bow:

Robert Bruce Graham, Jr., Clara Park (Ashford & Wriston)

Attorneys for Respondent-Appellee Kevin I. Yokoyama, as Trustee of the Kevin I. Yokoyama Trust and the Irvine K. Yokoyama, Jr. Trust:

Douglas C. Smith, Christopher J.I. Leong (Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert)

Attorney for Respondents-Appellees Julie Henderson, Trustee of the Julie G. Henderson Irrevocable Trust, Jean K. Gowans Irrevocable Trust, and Louis L. Gowans, Jr. Irrevocable Trust; and Richard L. Gowans, Trustee of the Richard L. Gowans Irrevocable Trust:

Blake W. Bushnell (Bushnell Law Group)

COURT: Fujise and Reifurth, JJ., and Circuit Court Judge Crabtree in place of Ginoza, C.J., Leonard and Chan, JJ., recused and a current vacancy.

[ Listen to the entire audio recording in mp3 format ]

Brief Description:

This appeal involves two trust proceedings consolidated by the Probate Court, namely T. No. 14-1-0019 and T. No. 14-1-0097. On June 4, 2014, in T. No. 14-1-0097, the Petitioner-Appellant Association of Apartment Owners of Discovery Bay (AOAO) filed a petition to sell the fee simple reversionary interest in the trust estate. The Probate Court denied the petition.

AOAO contends that the Probate Court erred because: (1) the sale of the reversionary interest would further the public policy favoring fee ownership of residential leasehold condominiums; (2) the trust agreement empowers the trust beneficiaries, by majority vote, to instruct the trustee to sell the reversionary interest; (3) the non-AOAO settlors’ arguments that (a) the AOAO has a conflict of interest, (b) the trustee is required to retain the reversionary interest, and (c) the sale of the reversionary interest requires unanimous consent all fail; and (4) the AOAO has the statutory right of first refusal.