Marn v. McCully Associates — Hawaii Supreme Court rejected Ueno’s certiorari application

Case
James Yee Marn, Jr., et al. v. McCully Associates, et al.
Court
Supreme Court of the State of Hawaiʻi
Judge
Sabrina S. McKenna (Neil Abercrombie, 2011); Todd W. Eddins (David Ige, 2020)
Date Decided
July 29, 2026
Docket No.
SCWC-23-0000434
Topics
Certiorari; Appellate Procedure; Limited Partnerships
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

The litigation involved McCully Associates, a Hawaiʻi registered limited partnership, its partners and related parties. James Yee Marn, Jr. brought claims as a limited partner on behalf of McCully Associates and its limited partners, and James K.M. Dunn participated as successor trustee of the Annabelle Y. Dunn Revocable Trust.

Thomas T. Ueno intervened in the case and appealed in the Intermediate Court of Appeals. He subsequently filed an application asking the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court to review the matter by writ of certiorari. The brief order does not describe the underlying claims, the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ ruling, or Ueno’s asserted grounds for review.

The Court’s Holding

The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court rejected Ueno’s application for a writ of certiorari, which had been filed on June 15, 2026.

The court did not provide substantive reasoning or address the merits of the underlying dispute. Its order therefore establishes only that discretionary supreme-court review was denied, leaving the Intermediate Court of Appeals proceedings undisturbed.

Key Takeaways

  • The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court declined to review Ueno’s appeal.
  • The order contains no analysis of the underlying partnership dispute or appellate issues.
  • The rejection of certiorari is not a merits ruling on the parties’ substantive claims.

Why It Matters

The order ends Ueno’s effort to obtain discretionary review in the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court in this proceeding. Because the court supplied no reasoning, the order offers no new doctrinal guidance for partnership law or appellate practice.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top