Szymanski argued that Deutsche Bank had missed its opportunity, claiming the statute of limitations was only six years. He pointed to a statute that applies to debt recovery actions based on contracts. Deutsche Bank disagreed, citing a different law that provides a twenty-year window for actions to recover possession of land. The trial court sided with Deutsche Bank, granting summary judgment in its favor. Szymanski’s attempts to overturn the decision – including motions for reconsideration and to vacate the judgment – were unsuccessful.
The case then moved to the Intermediate Court of Appeals, which consolidated Szymanski’s appeals. The appeals court vacated the circuit court’s judgment in part, but crucially, it affirmed the finding that Deutsche Bank’s foreclosure action was not time-barred because the statute of limitations is twenty years.
Still not satisfied, Szymanski took the statute of limitations question to the Hawaii Supreme Court. The justices accepted review only on that issue. On August 12, 2025, the court held that, based on its recent decision in Bank of New York Mellon v. White, the statute of limitations for mortgage foreclosure actions in Hawaii is twenty years under HRS § 657-31 – not six years as Szymanski argued. The court affirmed the appeals court’s judgment and closed the door on further debate.
For mortgage professionals, this decision brings much-needed clarity. The twenty-year window gives lenders and servicers a clear and extended period to enforce their rights if a borrower defaults. It also reduces the risk of losing the ability to foreclose due to a shorter limitations period, making the process more predictable and secure for those managing mortgages in Hawaii.
The Supreme Court’s decision is final. For Hawaii’s mortgage industry, the message is simple: you have twenty years to act on a foreclosure, and the rules are now set.