A Hawaii court recently ruled on an appeal involving PNC Bank and Herma Barbara Medina Reyna, a case that affects the ongoing foreclosure process. The Intermediate Court of Appeals dismissed Reyna's appeal, stating that the underlying case had already been terminated. This decision is significant as it underscores the importance of jurisdiction in foreclosure proceedings and clarifies the legal landscape for similar cases in the future.

The case, titled PNC Bank v. Reyna, was filed under docket number CAAP-24-0000385. It involved a dispute over a foreclosure initiated by PNC Bank against Reyna. The court's ruling, issued on June 12, 2026, indicates that Reyna's appeal was rendered moot due to the termination of the original case in the Second Circuit Court.

Background

PNC Bank, National Association, served as the plaintiff in this case, while Herma Barbara Medina Reyna was the defendant. The dispute arose when PNC Bank initiated foreclosure proceedings against Reyna, who subsequently appealed the decision. The case reached the Intermediate Court of Appeals after Reyna sought to challenge the actions taken by the bank.

The case began in the Second Circuit Court of Wailuku, Maui, where Reyna faced foreclosure actions from PNC Bank. Reyna's legal journey included a motion for reconsideration of a summary disposition order issued by the court. However, on May 31, 2026, the Second Circuit Court terminated the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which set the stage for the appellate court's eventual ruling.

The Ruling

The Intermediate Court of Appeals ruled on the matter following Reyna's filings. The court noted that Reyna had filed a Motion to Vacate and Reconsider Summary Disposition on June 2, 2026, seeking to challenge the prior ruling. However, the court found that the case had already been terminated, which meant there was no ongoing matter to reconsider.

The court stated, "We construe the Letter and the Notice together as a motion to withdraw the Motion for Reconsideration." This statement highlighted that Reyna's subsequent filings indicated a desire to withdraw her reconsideration request, leading to the court's decision to grant her motion to withdraw. The ruling effectively ended any further action regarding Reyna's appeal.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for foreclosure cases in Hawaii. By affirming that the appeal was moot due to the termination of the underlying case, the court clarified that once a case is terminated for lack of jurisdiction, any appeals related to that case cannot proceed. This reinforces the principle that courts must have jurisdiction to hear cases and that parties cannot appeal decisions if the underlying case is no longer active.

The decision may also serve as a precedent for future cases involving foreclosure disputes in Hawaii, emphasizing the importance of proper jurisdiction and the potential consequences of failing to address jurisdictional issues early in legal proceedings. It signals to both banks and borrowers that the legal process surrounding foreclosures must adhere strictly to jurisdictional requirements.

What's Next

Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Reyna plans to pursue any further legal action or if she may appeal this ruling. However, with the case terminated, it appears unlikely that there are any related cases pending that would affect this decision.