Lokahi Pacific v. Mundon
CAAP-22-0000086
| Haw. App. | Apr 15, 2025Background
- Joyce Mundon leased a unit managed by Lokahi Pacific in a federally subsidized supportive housing project for persons with disabilities.
- Lokahi Pacific issued two violation notices to Mundon in 2020, giving her ten days to remedy the violations.
- In June 2021, Lokahi Pacific terminated Mundon's lease, giving her 28 days to vacate (First Termination Notice), followed by another notice in August 2021 giving her 7 days to vacate (Second Termination Notice).
- After Mundon failed to vacate, Lokahi Pacific filed for summary possession, and the district court entered judgment for Lokahi Pacific.
- Mundon appealed, arguing Lokahi Pacific failed to provide the minimum notice required by her lease and relevant federal regulations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether proper notice of termination | Notices complied with lease/state law | Required 30 days under lease/HUD regs | Notices insufficient, less than 30 days needed |
| Statutory and regulatory compliance | State law allows shorter notice periods | Federal law trumps inconsistent state | Federal law/lease governs, mandates 30 days |
| Validity of lease termination | Lease termination was proper | Insufficient notice invalidates it | Lease termination invalid without proper notice |
| Due process violation | Not addressed | Due process was violated | Issue not reached (moot due to above holding) |
Key Cases Cited
- Lau v. Bautista, 61 Haw. 144 (Haw. 1979) (notice sufficiency judged on its face and statutory compliance is required for lease termination)
- Hawaiian Elec. Co. v. DeSantos, 63 Haw. 110 (Haw. 1980) (timing of notice for lease termination must align with statutory requirements)
- Waimanalo Vill. Residents' Corp. v. Young, 87 Haw. 353 (Haw. Ct. App. 1998) (strict compliance required for statutory lease termination procedures)