Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens in Hawaii

Understanding the Purpose and Significance of a Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens

“Hawai'i law authorizes the filing of notice of pendency of a lawsuit, or lis pendens, to render constructive notice of the suit to purchasers of real property.” (See Lathrop v. Sakatani (2006) 111 Haw. 307, 311 n.5.)

“In Hawai'i, the doctrine of lis pendens is codified in Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) sub. sections 501-151 (1993) (land court registered property) and 634-51 (Supp. 2005) (non-registered land).” (See id.)

“HRS sub. sec. 501-151 authorizes the filing or recording of a lis pendens against registered land for actions affecting the title to real property or the use and occupation thereof or the buildings thereon[.]" (See id.)

“Similarly, HRS sub. sec. 634-51 authorizes the recording of a lis pendens against non-registered land in the bureau of conveyances to provide constructive notice of the pendency of the action to a future purchaser.” (See id.)

“The terms lis pendens, notice of the pending action, and notice of pendency of the action are used interchangeably.” (See id.)

“The application of lis pendens is restricted to actions directly seeking to obtain title to or possession of real property.” (See Lathrop v. Sakatani (2006) 111 Haw. 307, 310.)

Procedural Steps Involved in Filing a Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens under Hawaii Revised Statutes Sub Section 634-51

Pursuant to HRS sub. sec. 634-51, “in any action concerning real property or affecting the title or the right of possession of real property, the plaintiff, at the time of filing the complaint, . . . may record in the bureau of conveyances a notice of the pendency of the action. . . . From and after' the time of recording the notice, a person who becomes a purchaser or incumbrancer of the property affected shall be deemed to have constructive notice of the pendency of the action and be bound by any judgment entered therein if the person claims through a party to the action[.]” (See Haw. Rev. Stat. sub. sec. 634-51; Lathrop v. Sakatani (2006) 111 Haw. 307, 311 n.5.)

“From and after the time of recording the notice, a person who becomes a purchaser or encumbrancer of the property affected shall be deemed to have constructive notice of the pendency of the action and be bound by any judgment entered therein if the person claims through a party to the action; provided that in the case of registered land, section 501-151, sections 501-241 to 501-248, and part II of chapter 501 shall govern.” (See id.)

“This section authorizes the recording of a notice of the pendency of an action in a United States District Court, as well as a state court.” (See id.)

“As used in this section, action; includes an administrative enforcement action by any state or county agency, board, or commission against a landowner for a land use violation or a currently unauthorized structure encroaching on public lands, including but not limited to submerged lands or lands within the shoreline, that falls, slides, or comes onto public land, or arises from or benefits an adjoining or abutting private land.” (See id.)

“This court interpreted HRS sub. sec. 634-51 in S. Utsnnomiya Enterprises, Inc. v. Moomuku Country Club, 75 Haw. 480, 866 P.2d 951 (1994), and held that: [a] lis pendens may only be filed in connection with an action:

1. concerning real property,
2. affecting title to real property, or
3. affecting . . . the right of possession of real property."

  (See Lathrop v. Sakatani (2006) 111 Haw. 307, 311 n.7; Kuapu v. Aloha Tower Dev. Corp. (1991) 72 Haw. 267, 269-70, 814 P.2d 396, 397 (citing HRS sub. sec. 634-51).)

“Therefore, the doctrine of lis pendens protect[s] a plaintiff from having his or her claim to the property defeated by the subsequent alienation of the property to a bona fide purchaser during the course of the lawsuit." (See id; ISA Int'l Ltd. v. Shimizu Corp. (1999) 92 Hawai'i 243, 266, 990 P.2d 713, 736.)

“This court, consequently, concluded that the lis pendens statute must be strictly construed and that the application of lis pendens should he limited to actions directly seeking to obtain title to or possession of real property.” (See id; S. Utsunomiya Enterprises, Inc. v. Moomuku Country Club (1994) 75 Haw. 480, 510.)

Discretion of the Court in Deciding a Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens

“Whether a lis pendens should be expunged is a question to be resolved in the exercise of the trial court's discretion; accordingly, the trial court's decision is reviewed for an abuse of that discretion.” (See TSA INTERN. LTD. v. SHIMIZU CORP (1999) 92 Haw. 243, 253; Harada v. Ellis (1983) 4 Haw. App. 439, 444-45, 667 P.2d 834, 838-39; Greenberg v. Superior Court (1982) 131 Cal.App.3d 441, 182 Cal.Rptr. 466.)

Legal Precedents and Case Law on a Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens

It is well settled that “allegations of equitable remedies, even if colorable, will not support a lis pendens if, ultimately, those allegations act only as a collateral means to collect money damages. It must be borne in mind that the true purpose of the lis pendens statute is to provide notice of pending litigation and not to make plaintiffs secured creditors of defendants nor to provide plaintiffs with additional leverage for negotiating purposes.” (See Urez Corp. v. Superior Court (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 1141, 1149.)

It is also well settled that “as we noted in Knauer v. Foote, 101 Hawai‘i 81, 87, 63 P.3d 389, 395 (2003), the sole function of a lis pendens is to notify prospective purchasers and encumbrancers that any interest acquired by them regarding property in litigation is subject to decision of a court. A lis pendens actually does not prevent title from passing to the grantee, but operates to cause the grantee to take the property subject to any judgment rendered in the action supporting the lis pendens. Thus, the practical effect of a recorded lis pendens is to render a ... property unmarketable and unusable as security for a loan.” (See S. Utsunomiya Enters., Inc. v. Moomuku Country Club (1994) 75 Hawai‘i 480, 502, 866 P.2d 951, 963; Peak Capital Grp., LLC v. Perez (2017) 407 P.3d 116, 133.)