***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX
05-SEP-2025
08:48 AM
Dkt. 21 SO
SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII
FREDERICK T. CAVEN, JR., on behalf of himself
and a class of similarly situated persons,
Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant,
vs.
CERTIFIED MANAGEMENT, INC., dba ASSOCIA HAWAII,
Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee.
CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
(CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX; CASE NO. 1CC161001778)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, Eddins, and Devens, JJ.,
and Ginoza, J., Dissenting)
Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant Frederick T. Caven,
Jr., co-owned a condominium unit located in Koloa, Kauaʻi (Unit).
As an owner of the Unit, Caven was a member of two homeowners
associations: (1) the Poipu Kai Association (PKA), a planned
community association; and (2) the Regency at Poipu Kai
Association of Apartment Owners (Regency AOAO), a condominium
association within PKA. Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee Certified ***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
Management, Inc., dba Associa Hawaii (Associa) was the managing
agent for PKA and Regency AOAO.
The following facts appear to be undisputed. In April
2016, Caven sold his Unit. In order to close on the sale, Caven
was required to obtain a Project Information Form RR105c (Form
RR105c) and a Statement of Account (SOA) from each association.
Form RR105c is “a time-sensitive disclosure form copyrighted and
used by [Hawaiʻi Association of REALTORS] to get the most up-todate information pertaining to the condominium association . . .
when a unit in the association is being offered for sale.” An
SOA is provided to escrow “once when escrow is opened so that
the escrow agent has an estimate of the associations’ charges
that need to be accounted for during the transaction” and “upon
request again right before the sale of the unit closes so that
escrow ensures it has the most accurate, up-to-date information
on the seller’s account.”
Caven’s realtor ordered digital copies for download of
the documents required to sell the Unit through Associa’s
website, “Community Archives.” For the document packages that
included the Form RR105c, Associa charged Caven: $390.62 for the
“Resale Disclosure Package” for Regency AOAO, including a
$360.00 processing fee, a $15.00 convenience fee, and $15.62 in
sales tax; and $182.29 for the “Documents Only Package” for PKA,
including a $165.00 processing fee, a $10.00 convenience fee,
2
***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
and $7.29 in sales tax. Additionally, Associa charged Caven
$437.50 for each SOA for Regency AOAO and PKA. 1 In total,
Associa charged Caven $1,447.91 for the documents required to
complete the sale of Caven’s Unit.
Caven challenged the propriety of those fees in the
Circuit Court of the First Circuit, 2 arguing that Associa
unlawfully charged unit owners unreasonable and excessive fees
for copies of documents it was legally required to maintain in
violation of Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (HRS) chapter 514B. 3
Associa filed a series of motions for partial summary judgment,
which the circuit court granted. On December 26, 2018, the
circuit court entered final judgment in favor of Associa.
Relevant here are two circuit court orders granting
partial summary judgment for claims relating to Regency AOAO. 4
The Order Granting Defendant Certified Management, Inc., dba
1 The record reflects Caven was charged $437.50 for each SOA for PKA and Regency AOAO. The $437.50 SOA charges included a $195 processing fee, $80 expedite fee, $145 transfer fee, and $17.50 in taxes.
2 The Honorable James H. Ashford presided.
3 Although Caven initially filed his complaint “on behalf of himself and a class of similarly situated persons,” no class was certified.
Caven’s First Amended Complaint alleged violations of HRS chapters 514B (Count I), 421J (Count II), and 480 (Count III). Only Caven’s challenges under HRS chapter 514B are relevant in this appeal. HRS § 514B-21 (2018) provides in relevant part that “[t]his chapter applies to all condominiums created within this State[.]”
4 Caven’s claims against Associa arising from fees for the PKA documents were separately dismissed by the circuit court because PKA, a planned community association, is not a condominium association within the meaning of HRS chapter 514B. Caven does not challenge the dismissal.
3
***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
Associa Hawaii’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Count I
and II of the First Amended Complaint (Order IV), filed July 19,
2018, found the Form RR105c and the SOA prepared by Associa were
not subject to HRS chapter 514B. The Order Granting Defendant
Certified Management, Inc., dba Associa Hawaii’s Motion for
Partial Summary Judgment on Count I of the First Amended
Complaint (Order V), filed September 20, 2018, concluded that
there were no genuine issues of material fact on Caven’s claims
arising under HRS §§ 514B-154(e) and (g) (2018) because those
subsections “apply to ‘association[s],’ not ‘managing
agent[s],’” and therefore Associa was entitled to judgment as a
matter of law on those issues.
Caven appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals
(ICA) and, in a March 22, 2024 summary disposition order, the
ICA affirmed in part and vacated in part Orders IV and V. As is
relevant here, the ICA concluded the circuit court erred in
finding that (1) HRS chapter 514B only applies to general
association documents and not the Form RR105c or the SOA for
Regency AOAO and (2) Associa, as a managing agent, is not
required to provide the Form RR105c and the SOA for Regency AOAO
for free under HRS § 514B-154.5(e) (2018). Thus, the ICA
vacated Order IV in part and Order V in its entirety and
remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings. Id.
at 9.
4
***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
Judgment on Appeal was entered on May 24, 2024.
Associa applied for writ of certiorari, which this court
granted.
Associa presents three questions to this court,
asserting the ICA gravely erred by reversing the circuit court’s
Orders IV and V. Specifically, Associa argues that the ICA
erred by holding (1) HRS § 514B-154.5(e)’s requirement that
documents made available at no cost for download applies both to
associations and their managing agents, (2) the document and
disclosure requirements of HRS § 154.5(a) are “not limited to
what the condominium association keeps . . . [or] pre-existing
documents,” and (3) Associa, as a managing agent, has a duty to
provide the Form RR105c and the Regency AOAO SOA. We affirm the
ICA.
Statutory interpretation is “a question of law reviewable
de novo.” This court’s construction of statutes is guided
by established rules:
First, the fundamental starting point for statutory
interpretation is the language of the statute itself.
Second, where the statutory language is plain and
unambiguous, our sole duty is to give effect to its
plain and obvious meaning. Third, implicit in the
task of statutory construction is our foremost
obligation to ascertain and give effect to the
intention of the legislature, which is to be obtained
primarily from the language contained in the statute
itself. Fourth, when there is doubt, doubleness of
meaning, or indistinctiveness or uncertainty of an
expression used in a statute, an ambiguity exists.
When there is ambiguity in a statute, “the meaning of
the ambiguous words may be sought by examining the
context, with which the ambiguous words, phrases, and
sentences may be compared, in order to ascertain
their true meaning.” Moreover, the courts may resort
to extrinsic aids in determining legislative intent,
5
***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
such as legislative history, or the reason and spirit
of the law.
Citizens Against Reckless Dev. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of
the City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 114 Hawaiʻi 184, 193–94, 159
P.3d 143, 152–53 (2007) (citations omitted).
In re Maui Fire Cases, 155 Hawaiʻi 409, 424-25, 565 P.3d 754,
769-70 (2025) (quoting State v. Wheeler, 121 Hawaiʻi 383, 390,
219 P.3d 1170, 1177 (2009)).
At base, Associa argues that because the Form RR10c
and the SOA are “reports prepared specifically for individual
association members,” those documents are not documents “kept”
by Regency AOAO within the meaning of HRS § 514B-152 (2018).
Thus, Associa, as the managing agent for Regency AOAO, was not
required to make the Form RR105c and the SOA available at “a
reasonable fee for duplication, postage, stationery, and other
administrative costs associated with handling the request” or
“at no cost” if available for download pursuant to HRS
§ 514B-154.5(b) and (e). Associa misreads the relevant
statutes.
HRS § 514B-152 requires condominium associations to
“keep financial and other records sufficiently detailed to
enable the association to comply with requests for information
and disclosures related to resale of units” and to make those
records “available pursuant to section 514B-154.5 for
examination by any unit owner and the owner’s authorized
agents.” HRS § 514B-154.5(a), in turn, requires managing
6
***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
agents, such as Associa, to “ma[k]e available to any unit owner
and the owner’s authorized agents” “documents, records, and
information, whether maintained, kept, or required to be
provided pursuant to this section or section 514B-152.”
Read together, HRS §§ 514B-152 and -154.5 require
managing agents to make available to a unit owner sufficiently
detailed financial and other records relating to the resale of
units. On their face, these statutorily mandated disclosures
are not limited to pre-existing documents. See HRS § 514B154.5(a) (requiring disclosure of “documents, records, and
information, whether maintained, kept, or required to be
provided” under the subsection). Because both the Form RR105c
and the SOA are “information and disclosures related to [the]
resale of units” within the meaning HRS § 514B-152, Associa had
a duty to make them available to Caven, whether or not they are
documents that are regularly maintained by Associa or Regency
AOAO.
HRS chapter 514B permits an association to charge unit
owners “a reasonable fee for duplication, postage, stationery,
and other administrative costs associated with handling the
[disclosure] request” under HRS § 514B-154.5(a). HRS
§ 514B-154.5(b). That reasonable fee “shall not exceed $1 per
page, or portion thereof, except that the fee for pages
exceeding eight and one-half inches by fourteen inches may
7
***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
exceed $1 per page.” Id. § 514B-154.5(f). However, HRS § 514B154.5(e) provides:
An association may comply with this section or
section 514B-152, 514B-153, or 514B-154 by making the
required documents, records, and information available to
unit owners or owners’ authorized agents for download
through an internet site, at the option of each unit owner
or owner’s authorized agent and at no cost to the unit
owner or owner’s authorized agent.
(Emphasis added.)
Associa argues that HRS § 514B-154.5(e) does not apply
to it because it is a managing agent, not an association, both
of which terms are defined separately under HRS chapter 514B.
See HRS § 514B-3 (2018) (“‘Association’ means the unit owners’
association organized under section 514B-102 or under prior
condominium property regime statutes. . . . ‘Managing agent’
means any person retained, as an independent contractor, for the
purpose of managing the operation of the property.”). However,
it is clear from the structure and language of HRS § 514B-154.5
that it imposes a duty on “association[s]” to make “documents,
records, and information” available through their “managing
agent, resident manager, board through a board member, or the
association’s representative.” HRS § 514B-154.5(a). An
association may comply with its duty under the section either by
providing paper copies at a reasonable fee under subsections
(b), (d), and (f). Otherwise, “[a]n association may comply
. . . by making the required documents, records, and information
available to unit owners or owners’ authorized agents for
8
***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
download through an internet site . . . at no cost to the unit
owner or owner’s authorized agent.” HRS § 514B-154.5(e).
It is immaterial for purposes of HRS § 514B-154.5(e)
whether that internet site is maintained by the association or
its managing agent. Because Associa made the Form RR105c and
the SOA for Regency AOAO available to Caven to download through
its internet site “Community Archives,” it was required to do so
“at no cost to the unit owner or owner’s authorized agent.” See
id.
Consistent with the discussion above, we conclude that
that Associa had a duty, pursuant to HRS §§ 514B-152 and -154.5
to make the Project Information Form RR105c and the Statement of
Account for the Regency at Poipu Kai Association of Apartment
Owners available to Caven, regardless of whether they are
regularly maintained by the association or the managing agent.
We further conclude that where a managing agent makes such
documents available for download through an internet site, they
must do so at no cost to the unit owner or the owner’s
authorized agent.
9
***NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER***
We therefore affirm the ICA’s May 24, 2024, Judgment
on Appeal.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, September 5, 2025.
David M. Louie /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald Ryan D. Louie
(Nicholas R. Monlux /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna on the briefs)
for petitioner/defendant- /s/ Todd W. Eddins appellee
/s/ Vladimir P. Devens
Margery S. Bronster
Robert M. Hatch
for respondent/plaintiffappellant
10