Skip to content

PropertyConcurrent ownership

Sawada v. Endo

Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii · Decided March 29, 1977 · Core case

Full citation

Sawada v. Endo, 561 P.2d 1291 (Haw. 1977).

Quote pages are pages of 57 Haw. 608, the official report, so quotes and pinpoints cite it; for 561 P.2d 1291, find the page in that reporter.

VerifiedQuotes, pinpoints and citation checked word for word against the opinion; facts checked against the opinion before publication. October 20, 2026.This brief explains the opinion as issued. Later treatment and current-law status are not assessed here.

Masako Sawada and Helen Sawada

injured judgment creditorsplaintiffs-appellants

Kokichi Endo, Samuel H. Endo, and Toru Endo

judgment debtor and his sonsdefendants-appellees

The parties: Masako Sawada and Helen Sawada v. Kokichi Endo, Samuel H. Endo, and Toru Endo.

Brief

Facts

On November 30, 1968, Masako Sawada and Helen Sawada were injured when a motor vehicle driven by Kokichi Endo struck them. Helen sued him for damages on June 17, 1969, and Masako sued him on August 13, 1969. He was served in both cases on October 29, 1969. When the accident happened, Kokichi owned a parcel of land at Wahiawa, Oahu, as a tenant by the entirety with his wife, Ume Endo. A tenancy by the entirety is a form of co-ownership open only to a married couple. By a deed dated July 26, 1969, Kokichi and Ume conveyed the land to their sons, Samuel H. Endo and Toru Endo. The deed was recorded on December 17, 1969. The sons paid nothing. Both knew their father had been in an accident and carried no liability insurance. The parents reserved no life interests and kept living on the land. On January 19, 1971, the Sawadas won judgments against Kokichi: $8,846.46 for Helen and $16,199.28 for Masako. Ume died on January 29, 1971, and Kokichi survived her. The Sawadas could not collect from Kokichi's personal property. They then sued to set aside the conveyance as fraudulent as to them.

Issues

  1. Is one spouse's interest in real property held as a tenancy by the entirety subject to levy and execution by that spouse's individual creditors?
  2. Was the husband and wife's conveyance of their entireties property to their sons a fraud on the husband's judgment creditors?

Holding

An estate by the entirety cannot be reached by the creditors of one spouse during the spouses' joint lives. So the conveyance of the land by Kokichi and Ume Endo to their sons was not in fraud of Kokichi's judgment creditors.

The rest of this brief is for subscribers

Student, Pro and Firm include the procedural history, the rule and the reasoning, the IRAC and CREAC versions, every key quote with its pinpoint, the citation box with parallel citations and short forms and the exam angle.

Learn the citation form

Short video lessons on the rules behind this brief’s citations, each with two pause-and-practice exercises.

The Citation Code · citationcode.com/cases/sawada-v-endo