Background
This matter originated in the Hawaii District Court (Case No. 1DSS-24-0000308) and was appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals (CAAP-24-0000298). The ICA issued a decision adverse to Petitioner/Respondent-Appellant Doreen Fukushima, who then sought further review by the Hawaii Supreme Court by filing an application for writ of certiorari on May 20, 2026.
The underlying district court case number carries the “1DSS” prefix, which designates a First Circuit District Court Special Sessions matter. The opinion does not disclose the substantive facts or claims litigated below.
The Court’s Holding
The Hawaii Supreme Court, in a brief order signed by Chief Justice Devens and Justices McKenna, Eddins, and Ginoza, along with Circuit Judge Wong sitting by assignment due to a vacancy, unanimously rejected Fukushima’s application for writ of certiorari.
The court provided no written analysis or explanation for the rejection, which is standard practice when the court declines discretionary review. The ICA’s ruling in favor of Appellee Lindsay N. McAneeley therefore stands as the final appellate disposition.
Key Takeaways
- The Hawaii Supreme Court declined discretionary review, leaving the Intermediate Court of Appeals decision in McAneeley’s favor undisturbed.
- The order is purely procedural; no substantive legal analysis or reasoning was provided by the court.
- Circuit Judge Paul B.K. Wong sat by assignment due to a vacancy on the court.
Why It Matters
This order has no precedential value and creates no new law. Its practical significance is solely that Fukushima’s appellate options in the Hawaii state courts are now exhausted, and the ICA’s ruling stands as final.
Attorneys should note that rejection of a certiorari application in Hawaii, as here, is a non-merits disposition — it signals only that the court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction, not that it affirmatively endorsed every aspect of the ICA’s reasoning.