COMING TO YOU LIVE DIRECTLY FROM THE DUBIN LAW OFFICES AT HARBOR COURT, DOWNTOWN HONOLULU, HAWAII

LISTEN TO KHVH-AM (830 ON THE AM RADIO DIAL)

ALSO AVAILABLE ON KHVH-AM ON THE iHEART APP ON THE INTERNET

.

Sunday – October 28, 2018

Summarizing and Understanding the Thirty-Five Year Transformation of Foreclosure Defense in Hawaii from 1983 to 2018, What Remains Ahead, and What the Hawaii Experience Can Mean for Listeners in Other States

.

 ———————

On past shows John and I, in addition to discussing foreclosure defense issues nationally, have highlighted a number of advances in judicial protections for Hawaii homeowners, in which our law firm has played a part, that have also caught the attention of numerous commentators nationwide.

Several of our listeners have requested that we summarize the history of those changes, how they occurred, and what additional advances in Hawaii can be anticipated in the future, of interest not only to our Hawaii listeners, but listeners in other States, including judges and legislators, who would like to replicate those changes in their jurisdiction.

On today’s show, therefore, John and I will discuss the Hawaii experience, concentrating on ten of the most important Hawaii appellate decisions that collectively have reshaped foreclosure defense in our State, challenging our listeners to achieve the same and more in their jurisdiction, including:

1. Hawai’i Community Federal Credit Union v. Keka, 94 Haw. 213, 11 P.3d 1 (2000);

2. GE Capital Hawaii v. Yonenaka, 96 Haw. App. LEXIS 113 (2001);

3. Beneficial Hawaii, Inc. v. Kida, 96 Haw. 289, 30 P.3d 895 (2001);

4. U.S. Bank v. Salvacion, 2011 Haw. App. LEXIS 387 (2011);

5. Kondaur Capital Corp. v. Matsuyoshi, 136 Haw. 227, 361 P.3d 454 (2015);

6. Santiago v. Tanaka, 137 Haw. 137, 366 P.3d 612 (2015);

7. Bank of America v. Reyes-Toledo, 139 Haw. 361, 390 P.3d  1248 (2017); Bank of America v. Reyes-Toledo 2, 2018 Haw. LEXIS 214, 2018 WL 4870719 (2018);

8. U.S. Bank v. Mattos, 140 Haw. 26, 398 P.3d 615 (2017);

9. Wells Fargo Bank v. Behrendt, 142 Haw. 37, 414 P.3d 89 (2018);

10. Sakal v. AOAO Hawaiian Monarch, 143 Haw. 219, 426 P.3d 443 (App. 2018), reconsideration denied, 2018 Haw. App. LEXIS 395, 2018 WL 4483207 (Haw. App. 2018).

When the audio of this Sunday’s show is posted on our website www.foreclosurehour.com, we will attach copies of all ten appellate opinions.

Thirty-five years ago in Hawaii our judges asked only whether a foreclosure defendant had timely paid his or her mortgage monthly.

Listen to this Sunday’s show to learn how different things are today in Hawaii Courts and what new protections may be expected.

Gary Dubin

.

CALL IN AT (808) 521-8383

Have your questions answered on the air.

Submit questions to info@foreclosurehour.com

The Foreclosure Hour is a public service of the Dubin Law Offices

Past Broadcasts