Background
Francis Grandinetti filed three documents in the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court on March 17, 2026. The filings sought agency injunction and mandamus relief concerning alleged police corruption and ticket fixing, and sought relief connected to a February 2025 arrest case in Hilo District Court.
The court construed the three filings as petitions for extraordinary writs. It considered the petitions and the record in the original proceeding arising from Case No. 3CPC-25-0000254.
The Court’s Holding
The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court denied the petitions. It held that Grandinetti had not shown either a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief or the absence of alternative means to obtain that relief, the requirements for an extraordinary writ.
The court also construed docket 14 as a motion and denied it. It directed the clerk to file a redacted version of docket 20 because the filing included a full account number that should have been redacted under Hawaiʻi Court Records Rules 2.19 and 9.
Key Takeaways
- Extraordinary writ relief requires a clear and indisputable right to relief.
- A petitioner also must show no adequate alternative means to obtain the requested relief.
- Filings containing unredacted personal financial information may be redacted under Hawaiʻi court-records rules.
Why It Matters
The order underscores the narrow availability of extraordinary writs: allegations and requests for intervention do not suffice without satisfying both the clear-right and no-alternative-remedy requirements.
It also illustrates the court’s enforcement of privacy-redaction requirements for personal financial information in filed records.