Skip to Content

Oral Argument Before the Hawaii Supreme Court — No. SCWC-17-0000496

No. SCWC-17-0000496, Thursday, August 25, 2022, 2 p.m.

JAMES B. NUTTER & COMPANY, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ELTON LANE NAMAHOE, SR., Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant, and SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, Respondent/Defendant-Appellee.

The above-captioned case has been set for oral argument on the merits at:

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

The oral argument was livestreamed for public viewing via the Judiciary’s YouTube channel at YouTube.com/hawaiicourts.

Attorneys for Petitioner Elton Lane Namahoe, Sr.: 

Kai Lawrence and William J. Rosdil of William J. Rosdil, AAL

Attorneys for Respondent James B. Nutter & Company: 

David J. Minkin and Brett R. Tobin of McCorriston Miller Mukai MacKinnon LLP

NOTE: Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 07/13/22.

NOTE: Amended Notice of Setting for Oral Argument due to rescheduling from 8/25/22 at 10:00 a.m. to 8/25/22 at 2:00 p.m., filed 08/22/22.

COURT: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.

Listen to the entire audio recording in mp3 format ]

Brief Description:

Defendant-Appellant Elton Lane Namahoe, Sr. executed a reverse mortgage on his property, located in the County of Hawai‘i, with James B. Nutter & Company (JBNC). JBNC instituted foreclosure proceedings against Namahoe for allegedly failing to make repairs to the property as required by the reverse mortgage. The Circuit Court of the Third Circuit (circuit court) granted JBNC’s motion for summary judgment, and the property was sold to the highest bidder (JBNC), which JBNC then sold to a third party.

More than two years after the circuit court’s foreclosure judgment, Namahoe filed a Hawai‘i Rules of Civil Procedure (HRCP) Rule 60(b) motion. Namahoe argues the following: under HRCP Rule 60(b)(3), JBNC committed fraud when it sought foreclosure on impermissible grounds; the circuit court’s judgment is void for lack of service on Namahoe per HRCP Rule 60(b)(4); and that under HRCP Rule 60(b)(6), JBNC committed fraud on the court. JBNC maintains that Namahoe’s HRCP Rule 60(b) motion is time barred, since it was raised more than a year after the foreclosure judgment. JBNC also argues that service was proper and assuming arguendo that there was fraud on the court, the circuit court properly determined that a HRCP Rule 60(b)(6) claim was better addressed in a separate wrongful foreclosure civil action.