Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Greenspon

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
27-NOV-2024
08:24 AM
Dkt. 213 SO

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE
OF RESIDENTIAL ASSET SECURITIZATION TRUST 2006-A8, MORTGAGE
PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2006-H UNDER THE POOLING
AND SERVICING AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 1, 2006, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. MICHAEL C. GREENSPON, Defendant-Appellant,
and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants.

MICHAEL C. GREENSPON, Counterclaim and Third-Party
Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY,
AS TRUSTEE OF RESIDENTIAL ASSET SECURITIZATION TRUST 2006-A8,
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2006-H
UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 1, 2006,
Counterclaim Defendant-Appellee, and OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC;
DAVID B. ROSEN, ESQ.; THE LAW OFFICE OF DAVID B. ROSEN, ALC,
Third-Party Defendants-Appellees.

MICHAEL C. GREENSPON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
ONEWEST BANK, N.A.; DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY;
DAVID B. ROSEN, ESQ.; THE LAW OFFICE OF DAVID B. ROSEN, ALC,
Defendants-Appellees, and DOES 10-50, Defendants.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT
(CASE NOS. 2CC141000395(2) AND 2CC141000560(2))
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Hiraoka, Presiding Judge, Nakasone and McCullen, JJ.)

Self-represented Plaintiff/Defendant/Counterclaimant/

Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant Michael C. Greenspon appeals

from the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit's 1 June 10, 2020

Final Judgment, July 7, 2020 order denying Greenspon's motion

for partial reconsideration, and 35 other circuit court

decisions.

In March 2003, Greenspon obtained a $650,000.00

mortgage loan for a property in Ha‘ikū, Maui (the Ha‘ikū

Property). In May 2006, Greenspon modified the loan, increasing

the principal amount to $800,000.00. In November 2008,

Greenspon was sent a notice stating that his loan was "in

serious default" and that he must pay $27,664.44 on or before

December 6, 2008 to cure the default.

In February 2010, the Ha‘ikū Property was sold at a

public non-judicial foreclosure auction to Defendant/Plaintiff/

Counterclaim Defendant-Appellee Deutsche Bank National Trust

Company, as Trustee. 2

1 The Honorable Peter T. Cahill presided.

2 Greenspon participated in various other trial and appellate cases in
state and federal court against other parties involved in the non-judicial
foreclosure of the Ha‘ikū Property. These cases include, without limitation:
1CC111000194 (CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX); 2CC171000090 (CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX & CAAP-20-
0000442); 2CC141000379 (CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX); 2CC191000092 (CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX); and
Civil No. 19-00516 JAO-KJM.

2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

After years of litigation, in October 2019, the

circuit court compelled discovery, ordering Greenspon to allow

the parties to inspect the Ha‘ikū Property and submit to a

deposition. The circuit court also verbally admonished

Greenspon for his behavior. The following month, the circuit

court compelled Greenspon to respond to discovery requests,

which focused on Greenspon's use of the Ha‘ikū Property as a

short-term vacation rental through Airbnb.

In March 2020, the circuit court approved and entered

a stipulated order dismissing all claims by and against

Greenspon, Deutsche Bank, and Third-Party Defendant-Appellee

Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC following Hawai‘i Rules of Civil

Procedure (HRCP) Rule 41(a)(1)(B).

In May 2020, as a sanction for discovery violations

under HRCP Rule 37, the circuit court dismissed with prejudice

"all of Mr. Greenspon's allegations and claims brought in these

consolidated actions against" Defendants/Third-Party Defendants-

Appellees David B. Rosen, Esq. and The Law Office of David B.

Rosen (together, Rosen Parties) and Defendant-Appellee CIT Bank

N.A., f.k.a. Onewest Bank N.A., f.k.a. Onewest Bank, FSB.

3
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

On appeal in this case, Greenspon raises six points of

error 3 challenging the circuit court's dismissal of the

underlying case(s) and various decisions related to motions for

summary judgment.

Upon careful review of the record and the briefs

submitted by the parties and having given due consideration to

the issues raised and the arguments advanced, we resolve this

appeal as discussed below, and affirm.

3 In his points of error (POE), Greenspon contends the circuit court
erred:

1. "in its failure to grant [his] MPSJ finding that the
September, 2011 settlement agreement with the FDIC is a valid
contract and to hold CIT and Rosen liable for tortious
interference";

2. "in its failure to grant [his] MPSJ and to find that CIT and
Rosen's 2010 auction sale on an admittedly unpublished date
was unlawful";

3. in "its failure to grant summary judgment for [him] as to any
elements of his claims of Appellees' 1) FDCPA and 2) HRS
§ 480D violations, and 3) abuse of process";

4. "by granting [Deutsche Bank and Ocwen's] MSJ and dismissing
[his] claims of forgery, fraud, and intentional/reckless
misrepresentation";

5. "by granting [Deutsche Bank and Ocwen's] MSJ and dismissing
[his] claims of conversion"; and

6. "by capriciously dismissing [his] whole case on the eve of
trial as to Appellees Rosen and CIT as a disproportional and
unjustified Rule 37 sanction based on fallacious made-up and
conclusory findings and erroneous and prejudicial conclusions,
and by failing to reconsider its erroneous dismissal order and
vacate its unjust award of fees."

(Formatting altered.)

4
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Our review of Greenspon's challenge to the circuit

court's dismissal of these consolidated cases is dispositive. 4

Greenspon argues there was no prejudice regarding the inspection

of the Ha‘ikū Property and discovery requests, and appears to

minimize his behavior throughout the proceedings.

Under HRCP Rule 37(b)(2), if "a party fails to obey an

order to provide or permit discovery" the circuit court may make

orders "as are just" including "dismissing the action[.]" HRCP

Rule 37(b)(2)(C). We review an HRCP Rule 37(b)(2) dismissal for

an abuse of discretion. Aloha Unlimited, Inc. v. Coughlin, 79

Hawai‘i 527, 532-33, 904 P.2d 541, 546-47 (App. 1995).

Here, the circuit court made extensive findings

regarding Greenspon's conduct, and Greenspon has not shown those

findings were clearly erroneous. The circuit court's findings

and the record in this case provide sufficient evidence to

support the circuit court's sanction of dismissal. See

Greenspon v. Deutsche Bank, 154 Hawai‘i 292, 550 P.3d 258, CAAP-

XX-XXXXXXX and CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, 2024 WL 2874544 at *4, *6-7

(App. June 7, 2024) (SDO) (explaining the "extensive findings

regarding Greenspon's contumacious conduct with respect to,

4 We need not address POE 1-3 regarding denial of Greenspon's partial
motions for summary judgment on various claims against CIT and Rosen parties
where the sanctions order at issue in POE 6 dismissed all claims.

We also need not address POE 4 and 5 because these claims are not
within the scope of this appeal as they were dismissed by stipulation.

5
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

inter alia, the site inspection of the Ha‘ikū property, and

opposing counsel's attempts to depose him") (footnote omitted);

Erum v. Llego, 147 Hawai‘i 368, 390, 465 P.3d 815, 837 (2020);

W.H. Shipman, Ltd. v. Hawaiian Holiday Macadamia Nut Co., 8 Haw.

App. 354, 362, 802 P.2d 1203, 1207 (1990). As such, the circuit

court did not abuse its discretion.

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the circuit

court's June 10, 2020 Final Judgment and July 7, 2020 order

denying Greenspon's motion for partial reconsideration.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, November 27, 2024.

On the briefs: /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
Presiding Judge
Michael C. Greenspon,
Plaintiff/Defendant/ /s/ Karen T. Nakasone
Counterclaimant/ Third-Party Associate Judge
Plaintiff-Appellant, pro se.
/s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
Judy A. Tanaka, Associate Judge
Jenny J.N.A. Nakamoto,
(Dentons),
for Defendant-Appellee.

6