Category Archives: Law

Tenants caught in the middle after city cites downtown building owner for illegal residential rentals

Civil Beat’s recent coverage of horrendous living conditions in illegal residential rentals in a derelict commercial building in downton Honolulu caught my attention, so I decided to look at the situation. Maybe something useful will result, maybe not. You never know at this point. So come along for the ride.

The CB stories focus on the situation in Union Plaza, a 59-year old building at 1136 Union Mall.

Reporter Stewart Yerton first reported on conditions in the building last month (“They Signed Up For Co-Living In Honolulu And Got A ‘Hell Hole’“), and followed with a second story just last week (“‘Hell-Hole’ Building Tenants Gain Traction In Court As Conditions Deteriorate“).

In his first story, Yerton summarized the situation.

For the last year, dozens of people have been living in the office building without kitchens, air conditioning and proper ventilation — and limited access to showers, multiple current and former residents told Civil Beat. Despite complaints to city and state agencies, conditions for residents have deteriorated. A police officer noted the building was totally unsecured in April, the same month a tenant reported a teenager had been sexually assaulted in the family’s unit.

Then, as pressure mounted, the building’s owners shut down power and air conditioning, and issued eviction notices to everyone.

Screenshot

It seems those who have been paying to live in these squalid conditions are caught in a legal battle in which the building’s former owner and mortgage holder is seeking to foreclose and retake control of the building from a limited liability company that bought it last year.

The former and current owners are both real estate investers and developers.

Real estate records show the building was purchased for $6.5 million on April 8, 2024 by Union Mall Development Group LLC, which financed the purchase largely via a $5.2 million purchase money mortgage from the seller, real estate developer Tomoya Tsuruhara. That simply means that the seller accepted a down payment, and took back a mortgage in which the buyer promised to pay off the mortgage loan by a set date. The principals in Union Mall Development Group, Chad Waters and his partner, Scott Bingo, aslo provided personal guarantees that the loan would be repaid.

The mortgage required UMDG to make three payments–$200,000 due on October 8, 2024 an additional $450,000 that was due April 8, 2025, and a final payment of the outstanding balance due at maturity on April 8, 2026.

After the first payment was missed, UMDG was given written notice that it was in default on the mortgage, and that the plaintiff “reserved its rights and remedies against the Borrower under the Loan Documents, including, but not limited to, foreclosure of the Mortgage.”

The April deadline also passed without any payment, and a foreclosure lawsuit was then filed in First Circuit Court on June 9, asking that the court certify the amounts due and authorize sale of the building at a foreclosure sale, with Tsuruhara able to use the unpaid amount as credit to be bid in the foreclosure sale. The complaint put the total amount then due at $5,712,067.61, with interest and other costs, including legal fees, continuing to rise.

Waters, Bingo, and Union Mall Development Group responded that an allegedly undisclosed “subterranean encroachment that materially affects the property’s boundaries, use, and value,” created a cloud on the building’s title which blocked their attempts to refinance the mortgage loan.

Waters and Bingo allege that following their purchase, they were informed by a maintenance employee that portions of the driveway into the parking garage of the neighboring building at 1132 Bishop Street, including walkways and a utilities room, extended under a portion of their building at 1136 Union Mall. They claim they had been unaware of the encroachment, and allege Tsuruhara had been informed of the encroachment but did not disclose it prior to the sale.

For his part, Tsuhara has denied the allegations and said he “acted in good faith and in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and contractual obligations,” and raised a nunber of other defenses, including that the sales contract contained an “as is” clause, meaning that the property was being sold in its present condition.

On November 10, the same day Civil Beat published a follow-up on the plight of residents, Tsuhara’s attorneys filed a motion asking the court to appoint a receiver, attaching Civil Beat’s initial description of rapidly deteriorating conditions in the building to demonstrate “a legitimate concern exists as to the worsening condition of the Property.” And within days, a motion was filed to expedite a hearing on the request for appointment of a receiver due to the building’s continuing deterioration. That motion is pending.

A copy of the Civil Beat story was attached to the motion. Also attached is an email from Dawn Apuna, director of the city’s Department of Planning and Permitting, identifying multiple notices of violation and notices of orders issued to Chad Waters “for unpermitted construction, change of occupancy, and illegal short-term rentals (STRs).”

She says the city has not been able to serve Waters despite repeated attempts, perhaps indicating he is actively avoiding legal service.

A notice of violation (NOV) officially informs a property owner of a violation and provides a deadline to fix it. A notice of order (NOO) is issued when no corrective action is taken, including potential fines and the appeal process.

It appears that each of these violations could violate another provision of the mortage requiring Union Mall Development to comply with “all existing and future laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, orders, building restrictions and requirements of, and
all permits and approvals from, and agreements with and commitments to,” any government or legal authority.

Apuna’s email with the list of violations is included below.

Judge issues rare rebuke of federal prosecutors in criminal case against former FBI director

A story today NY Times reporter Alan Feuer described a remarkable development in the government’s criminal prosecution of former FBI director James Comey.

A federal magistrate judge said on Monday that the criminal case against James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, could be in trouble because of a series of apparent errors committed in front of the grand jury by Lindsey Halligan, the inexperienced prosecutor picked by President Trump to oversee the matter.

The remarkable rebuke of Ms. Halligan came in a 24-page ruling in which the magistrate judge, William E. Fitzpatrick, ordered her to give Mr. Comey’s lawyers all of the grand jury materials she used to obtain the indictment and raised the question of whether “government misconduct” in the case might require dismissing the charges altogether.

Grand Jury materials almost always remain confidential.

Judge Fitzpatrick’s order recognized that full disclosure to the defense is “an extraordinary remedy,” but explained that “given the factually based
challenges the defense has raised to the government’s conduct and the prospect that government misconduct may have tainted the grand jury proceedings, disclosure of grand jury materials under these unique circumstances is necessary to fully protect the rights of the accused.”

The 27-page memorandum opinion, which is attached below, spells out in detail just how badly the government appears to have botched this case, beginning with its failure to properly execute search warrants in 2019 and 2020 in an unrelated matter to either avoid seizing evidence beyond the scope of the warrants, and identify and separate items the would be covered by attorney-client or other legal privileges.

The prosecutor who presented the proposed indictment to the grand jury was Lindsey Halligan, who President Trump named as the interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virgina because she indicated she would file criminal charges against Comey that had been turned down by her predecessor, who Trump fired due to his refusal to prosecute the case. At the time of her appointment, Halligan, an insurance attorney, had never prosecuted a case, had no experience as a prosecutor, but had served at one point as one of Trump’s personal attorneys.

At the bottom of page 20, Fitzpatrick ticks off eleven findings of fact that each provides “a reasonable basis” for Comey’s defense team to challenge specific points that could provide “ground[s]…to dismiss the indictment because of a matter that occurred before the grand jury,” as provided by Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

I recommend reading through the opinion in order to appreciate the range of problems that Judge Fitzpatrick’s opinion itemizes. Non-lawyers can skim over the legalese sections and pay closer attention to factual findings of what happened and what the errors mean for the case.

New charges being considered in probate fraud case

It has been nearly six months since Robert Earl Chapman, the former managing partner of a large downtown Honolulu law firm, was indicted on 22 counts stemming from the alleged theft of property held by the estate of a deceased client.

Chapman has pleaded “not guilty” to the charges, although his attorney, Myles Breiner, has indicated in a court filing that a change of plea is “probable.”

According to the indictment, Chapman went to court in 2018 to obtain authority as the “personal representative” of a Honolulu man who had died two years previously.

He then allegedly used fraudulently created or altered documents to transfer property valued at $750,000 from the estate to himself or to a company in which he was the sole officer.

Court records show at least one plea offer has been made by prosecutors, and negotiations over terms of a plea agreement are ongoing and a trial date has been postponed several times.

Chapman has been free after posting a $1 million bail bond. He and his wife took out a $1 million mortgage on their Lanikai home to secure the bond.

More than two years before his indictment, Chapman gave up his license to practice law in lieu of being disbarred by the Hawaii Supreme Court following a lengthy investigation of a different case of probate fraud.

Now, with a possible plea deal still in limbo, prosecutors appear to be ready to play hardball by adding at least one additional charge.

During a court hearing two weeks ago, prosecutors said an additional charge is being considered.

“State updated the court as to a potential new criminal case,” according to minutes of the October 20 hearing. A further update “as to the additional charge” will be provided at a hearing February 6, 2026, the hearing minutes available online show.

There is no other indication of what the additional charge or new criminal case might be.

Meanwhile, Chapman has been traveling.

He requested and received court approval to travel out of state on two different trips since he was charged in June.

He was allowed to fly to Massachusetts, and then drive through New Hampshire and on to Maine between September 21 and October 11. This is considered the best time for “leaf peeping,” or traveling to enjoy view of vibrant colors of the fall folliage.

He has also received court approval to spend five weeks in New Zealand visiting his grandchildren between December 8 and January 13, 2026.

Also see:

Fraud allegations lead to resignation of prominent business attorney, December 29, 2022.

Former Honolulu attorney indicted in alleged $750K probate fraud, iLind.net, June 21, 2025.