Summary
The Hawaiʻi Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit’s judgment granting Deutsche Bank summary judgment in Lani Pacific’s action. The court held that an HRCP Rule 60(b) motion is a continuation of the original action, but concluded that the 2015 foreclosure dismissal did not render later judgments void because no final judgment had been entered in the 2015 action. To the extent the 2023 filing constituted a separate action, the claims were barred by res judicata.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Hawaiʻi Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 60(b) may be used to initiate a new independent action rather than as a continuation of the original action.
- Whether the 2015 foreclosure action's dismissal for lack of prosecution, absent entry of a final judgment, rendered the judgments in the 2019 foreclosure action and 2020 quiet-title action void.
- Whether Deutsche Bank's alleged failure to inform the circuit court about the 2015 dismissal constituted fraud upon the court.
- Whether claims asserted as a separate 2023 action were barred by res judicata.
- Whether the circuit court properly granted summary judgment to Deutsche Bank.
Holdings
- An HRCP Rule 60(b) motion is a continuation of the original action and cannot serve as the basis for initiating a new independent action. To the extent Lani Pacific's 2023 filing was a Rule 60(b) motion, it was treated as a continuation of the prior foreclosure and quiet-title proceedings.
- The 2015 foreclosure action's dismissal for want of prosecution did not render the judgments in the 2019 foreclosure action and 2020 quiet-title action void because no final judgment was entered in the 2015 action.
- The fraud-upon-the-court argument was waived because it was not shown to have been raised in the trial court; in any event, the alleged nondisclosure did not constitute fraud upon the court because the 2015 action had no final judgment on the merits.
- The claims asserted in the 2023 action were barred by res judicata because the prior actions resulted in final judgments on the merits, involved the same parties, and concerned the same mortgage-interest dispute; the claims were raised or could have been raised previously.
- The circuit court properly granted Deutsche Bank's motion for summary judgment.
Key quotations
“However, as stated above, HRCP Rule 60(b) is a continuation of the original proceeding and, thus, cannot be a basis for initiating an independent action.” (at 7)
“Thus, there was no final judgment on the merits in the 2015 Foreclosure Action that would render the 2019 Foreclosure Action and the 2020 Quiet Title Action void.” (at 9-10)
“Thus, the claims in the 2023 Action were raised or could have been raised in the 2019 Foreclosure Action and the 2020 Quiet Title Action and are barred by res judicata.” (at 11)
Factual background
Deutsche Bank initiated a 2015 foreclosure action concerning property at 79-7250 Saint Paul Road, Kealakekua, Hawaiʻi, but the action was dismissed for lack of prosecution and no final judgment was entered. Lani Pacific later purchased the property from the original mortgagors and was named in Deutsche Bank's 2019 foreclosure action, in which Deutsche Bank obtained a foreclosure decree and judgment. Lani Pacific's separate 2020 quiet-title action was dismissed on summary judgment, and after those judgments were affirmed, Lani Pacific filed a new action seeking Rule 60(b) relief and asserting claims concerning Deutsche Bank's mortgage interest, wrongful foreclosure, fraud, conversion, and misuse of process.
Procedural history
Deutsche Bank's 2015 foreclosure action was dismissed for want of prosecution under RCCH Rule 29, but no final judgment was entered. Deutsche Bank later obtained a foreclosure judgment in the 2019 foreclosure action, and it obtained summary judgment dismissing Lani Pacific's 2020 quiet-title action; those judgments were affirmed on appeal and certiorari was denied. Lani Pacific then filed the 2023 action as a new case while attempting to seek Rule 60(b) relief from the earlier judgments. The circuit court granted Deutsche Bank summary judgment, concluding that Lani Pacific lacked standing to challenge the assignment, that there was no fraud on the court, and that the remaining claims were barred by res judicata.