CourtListener 10876537

Texto completo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
17-JUN-2026
08:39 AM
Dkt. 52 SO

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
AS TRUSTEE FOR OPTION ONE MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-3;
ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007-3, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
STUART KUNIO SAITO and RAYNETTE KUILANI SAITO,
Defendants-Appellants, and
ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF KEAʻAHALA VISTA,
Defendant-Appellee; and
JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10;
DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10; DOE ENTITIES 1-10; and
DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS 1-10, Defendants.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
(CASE NO. 1CCV-XX-XXXXXXX)

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

Defendants-Appellants Stuart Kunio Saito and Raynette

Kuilani Saito (Saitos) appeal from the Circuit Court of the

First Circuit's July 3, 2024 "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of

Law and Order Granting [Plaintiff-Appellee Wells Fargo Bank,

National Association as Trustee for Option One Mortgage Loan

Trust 2007-3, Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2007-3's (Wells
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Fargo)] Motion for Default Judgment and Summary Judgment and

Decree of Foreclosure Against All Defendants on Complaint Filed

October 28, 2020" (Summary Judgment Order) and July 3, 2024

Judgment. 1

On appeal, the Saitos challenge the granting of

summary judgment, contending (1) Wells Fargo did not establish

that the documents submitted were trustworthy and the Note was

validly indorsed; (2) Wells Fargo did not show the default

notice was mailed to the Saitos; and (3) the circuit court erred

by precluding the Saitos from raising objections to the

indorsement of the Note because they failed to file an answer. 2

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.

On October 28, 2020, Wells Fargo filed the Complaint

underlying this appeal against the Saitos, the Association of

Apartment Owners of Keaʻahala Vista, and various doe defendants. 3

Wells Fargo alleged that the Saitos executed an adjustable-rate

1 The Honorable James H. Ashford presided.

2 The Saitos present four points of error (POE) on appeal. The first
POE has four subpoints, the first and third of which are considered together
in the first contention as construed above. The remaining POEs challenge
findings and conclusions related to the subpoints in the first POE.

3 Wells Fargo and the Saitos were involved in separate litigation
involving the Property, but that litigation is not relevant to resolving this
appeal. See CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX.
2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

note (Note), dated December 19, 2006, for the principal sum of

$391,000.00 in favor of Mortgagepointer.com, Inc., which was

secured by a mortgage (Mortgage) on their real property at 45-

580C Keaʻahala Road, Kāneʻohe, Hawaiʻi (Property).

At the time the complaint was filed, Wells Fargo's

counsel possessed the Note together with the three allonges

attached to the Note. The third allonge was an undated special

indorsement to Wells Fargo.

In February 2024, Wells Fargo moved for summary

judgment. The circuit court issued a minute order granting the

motion for summary judgment and subsequently entered the Summary

Judgment Order and Judgment. The Saitos timely appealed.

We review the grant or denial of summary judgment de

novo. Nationstar Mortg. LLC v. Kanahele, 144 Hawaiʻi 394, 401,

443 P.3d 86, 93 (2019).

A party seeking to foreclose under a note and mortgage

must "prove the existence of an agreement, the terms of the

agreement, a default by the mortgagor under the terms of the

agreement, and giving of the cancellation notice." Bank of Am.,

N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo, 139 Hawaiʻi 361, 367, 390 P.3d 1248, 1254

(2017). The foreclosing party must establish that it was

entitled to enforce the note when its complaint was filed. Id.

at 369, 390 P.3d at 1256.

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

(1) The Saitos contend that "Wells Fargo cannot show

that the Note was validly endorsed" or that "the documents they

sought to introduce into evidence were trustworthy."

Promissory notes are not hearsay, but copies of

promissory notes submitted to support a motion for summary

judgment are not self-authenticating and are only admissible if

authenticated by extrinsic evidence. U.S. Bank Tr., N.A., as

Tr. for LSF9 Master Participation Tr. v. Verhagen, 149 Hawaiʻi

315, 325, 489 P.3d 419, 429 (2021).

The Note at issue in the underlying foreclosure

proceeding was payable to Mortgagepointer.com, Inc., and Wells

Fargo submitted copies of the Note with three allonges,

specially indorsing the Note to Wells Fargo, to support its

motion for summary judgment.

A declaration from attorney Steven T. Iwamaura of Clay

Chapman Iwamura Pulice and Nervell, who filed the foreclosure

complaint for Wells Fargo, established that his law firm

received the original Note and allonges on July 5, 2017, from

the Locke Lorde LLP law firm in California, which serves as

Wells Fargo's managing counsel. Iwamura stated that he

personally reviewed the original Note and original allonges to

the Note on the day the complaint was filed. He was a competent

witness to authenticate the Note and establish Wells Fargo's

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

standing to enforce it when the foreclosure complaint was filed.

See Hawaiʻi Rules of Evidence (HRE) Rule 602.

(2) The Saitos next contend the circuit court erred

by ruling that they "could not raise objections to the

endorsement of the Note because no Answer was filed."

However, Hawaiʻi Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 8(d)

provides that "[a]verments in a pleading to which a responsive

pleading is required, other than those as to the amount of

damage, are admitted when not denied in the responsive

pleading." And the Saitos do not dispute that they did not file

an answer to the complaint, even after the entry of default

against them was set aside.

(3) Finally, the Saitos contend that "Wells Fargo

cannot show that the default letter was mailed to [them] as

required by the Mortgage."

The record includes copies of an August 21, 2020

Notice of Default and PHH Mortgage Corporation (PHH)'s mailing

record showing PHH mailed the Notice of Default to the Saitos at

the Property. Claribel Lopez was competent to testify as to

PHH's own records because she identified herself as a custodian

of PHH's records. See HRE Rule 803(b)(6). Her declaration

described circumstances indicating the trustworthiness of PHH's

incorporated records:

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

2. PHH's records include and incorporate records
for the Loan obtained from Homeward Residential, Inc. and
Ocwen Loan Servicing ("Prior servicers"), which are the
prior loan servicers for this loan. The records obtained
by PHH from the Prior servicers are kept and maintained by
PHH in the ordinary course of its business for the purpose
of maintaining an accounting of payments received, expenses
incurred, and amounts advanced with regard to the Loan, and
such records are relied upon by PHH in the regular course
of its business. The information regarding the Loan
transferred to PHH from the Prior Servicers have been
validated in many ways, including, but not limited to,
going through a due diligence phase, review of hard copy
documents, and review of the payment history and accounting
of other fees, costs, and expenses charged to the Loan by
Prior Servicers. It is PHH's regular practice, after these
phases are complete, to receive records from prior servicer
and integrate these records into PHH's business records at
the time of acquisition. Once integrated, PHH maintains
and relies on these business records in the ordinary course
of its mortgage loan servicing business.

(Emphasis added); see Verhagen, 149 Hawaiʻi at 325-26, 489 P.3d

at 429-30.

Based on the foregoing, we affirm the circuit court's

July 3, 2024 Summary Judgment Order and Judgment.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, June 17, 2026.

On the briefs: /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
Presiding Judge
Keith M. Kiuchi,
for Defendants-Appellants. /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
Associate Judge
Zachary K. Kondo,
Mary Martin, /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
(Clay Iwamura Pulice & Associate Judge
Nervell),
for Plaintiff-Appellee.