Fung v. Hoi

Fung · Supreme Court of the State of Hawaiʻi · May 20, 2026 · No. SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX

Summary

The Supreme Court of the State of Hawaiʻi dismissed Petitioners’ motion seeking clarification or, alternatively, recall of the order denying certiorari. The court construed the filing as a motion for reconsideration and held that such a motion is barred by Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 40.1(h); it also denied Respondent’s request for attorney fees and costs.

Court
Supreme Court of the State of Hawaiʻi
Writing for the Court
Vladimir P. Devens, C.J.; Sabrina S. McKenna, J.; Todd W. Eddins, J.; Lisa M. Ginoza, J.; Jeannette H. Castagnetti, Circuit Judge, assigned by reason of vacancy
Jurisdiction
Supreme Court of the State of Hawaiʻi
Decision date
May 20, 2026
Docket number
SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX
Procedural posture
Petitioners moved for clarification or, alternatively, recall of the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court's order rejecting certiorari. The court construed the motion as a motion for reconsideration and dismissed it.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Wei Ling Fung, Fugang Xia aka Summer v. Wa Cham Hoi
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

writ of certiorarimotion for reconsiderationappellate procedureattorney feescosts

Practice areas

appellate procedurecivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a motion seeking clarification or recall of the Supreme Court's rejection of an application for a writ of certiorari may be treated as a motion for reconsideration and considered by the court.
  2. Whether Respondent was entitled to attorney fees and costs.

Holdings

  1. A rejection of an application for a writ of certiorari is not subject to a motion for reconsideration in the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court and is final; the court therefore dismissed Petitioners' motion.
  2. Respondent's request for attorney fees and costs was denied.

Key quotations

Neither acceptance nor rejection of an application for a writ of certiorari shall be subject to a motion for reconsideration in the supreme court. The rejection of an application for certiorari shall be final. (2)

Factual background

The opinion concerns a post-disposition motion filed after the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court rejected an application for a writ of certiorari. The motion was styled as one for clarification or, alternatively, recall of the rejection order. The record also included Respondent's opposition and a request for attorney fees and costs.

Procedural history

The matter was before the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court on certiorari to the Intermediate Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court had rejected the application for a writ of certiorari on April 20, 2026. Petitioners then filed a motion seeking clarification or recall of that order, which the court dismissed; the court also denied Respondent's request for attorney fees and costs.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…