Background
Sherri R. and Larry Frost, owners at the Pu’u Po’a condominium complex, brought suit in the Fifth Circuit Court of Hawaiʻi (Case No. 5CCV-20-0000058) against the Association of Apartment Owners of Pu’u Po’a, its management company Hawaiiana Management Company, and fellow owner Ann Ross. The case originated in 2020 on Kauaʻi and proceeded through the trial court before the Frosts appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) under docket CAAP-23-0000436.
After an adverse outcome at the ICA, the Frosts filed an application for writ of certiorari with the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court on April 24, 2026, seeking further review of the ICA’s decision.
The Supreme Court’s order does not set forth the underlying merits of the dispute, and the specific claims asserted against the association, management company, and co-defendant Ross are not detailed in this order.
The Court’s Holding
In a brief order dated June 10, 2026, a five-justice panel — Chief Justice Devens, Justices McKenna, Eddins, and Ginoza, and Circuit Judge Morikawa sitting by assignment — unanimously rejected the Frosts’ application for writ of certiorari. No written opinion accompanied the rejection.
The rejection leaves the ICA’s decision as the final appellate ruling in the case. Under Hawaiʻi appellate practice, rejection of a certiorari application is not a ruling on the merits but signifies that the Supreme Court declined to exercise its discretionary review.
Key Takeaways
- The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court declined to review the ICA’s decision, ending the Frosts’ appellate options in the state court system.
- The rejection is a one-sentence order with no written analysis; it does not constitute binding precedent on the underlying substantive issues.
- The case spanned roughly six years from filing (2020) through final appellate disposition (2026), illustrating the extended timeline common in Hawaii condominium association litigation.
Why It Matters
While the Supreme Court’s cert rejection carries no precedential weight, it closes the door on further state-court review for the Frosts in a dispute that involved both their condominium association and its professional management company — a pairing that appears frequently in Hawaiʻi AOAO litigation. Practitioners handling condominium disputes should note that the ICA’s underlying ruling, once issued, now stands as the controlling appellate authority for this dispute.
For condo owners and associations alike, the case is a reminder that the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court exercises highly selective discretionary review; securing certiorari requires demonstrating significant legal questions beyond the parties’ immediate interests, and the absence of any noted dissent here suggests the Court saw no such question warranting intervention.