Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Sonido v. District Court of First Circuit - Wri...
Routine Enforcement Amended Final

Sonido v. District Court of First Circuit - Writs Denied

Favicon for www.courts.state.hi.us Hawaii Supreme Court
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The Hawaii Supreme Court denied Sheldon Kalani Sonido's petition for writs of prohibition and mandamus, and dismissed his petition for a writ of certiorari without prejudice. The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief or a lack of alternatives, noting the district court had jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction over the counterclaim. If dissatisfied with the district court's dismissal, the petitioner could have sought appellate review under Hawaii Revised Statutes § 641-1(a).

“Petitioner has not demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to relief, nor a lack of alternatives to obtain the relief sought.”

Published by HI Supreme Court on courts.state.hi.us . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

About this source

GovPing monitors Hawaii Supreme Court for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 131 changes logged to date.

What changed

The Hawaii Supreme Court denied a petition challenging the District Court of the First Circuit's dismissal of the petitioner's counterclaim in case no. 1DRC-25-0004620. The court applied the standard that a petitioner must demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative remedies. The court further dismissed the certiorari petition without prejudice, noting the 30-day filing requirement under Hawaii Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 40.1(a)(1). Practitioners and litigants in Hawaii state courts should note that challenges to jurisdictional rulings at the district court level must be pursued through direct appeal of the judgment, not through extraordinary writ proceedings, unless exceptional circumstances exist warranting writ relief.

Archived snapshot

Apr 23, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-25-0000584 22-APR-2026 08:19 AM Dkt. 17 ODDP SCPW-25-0000584 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI ________________________________________________________________ SHELDON KALANI SONIDO, Petitioner, vs. DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, State of Hawaiʻi, Respondent Court, and HAWAII STATE FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Respondent. ________________________________________________________________ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE NO. 1DRC-25-0004620) ORDER DENYING PETITION (By: McKenna, Acting C.J., Eddins, Ginoza, and Devens, JJ., and Circuit Judge Drewyer, assigned by reason of vacancy) Upon consideration of the petition for writs of prohibition, mandamus, and certiorari, filed August 21, 2025, and the record, the district court had jurisdiction to determine whether it had jurisdiction over Petitioner's counterclaim. See Schwartz v. State, 136 Hawaiʻi 258, 263, 361 P.3d 1161, 1166 (2015). If the district court concludes it lacks jurisdiction

over the counterclaim, as it did in 1DRC-25-0004620, the district court may issue a decision stating as much. See In re Kanahele, 152 Hawaiʻi 501, 514, 526 P.3d 478, 491 (2023). If Petitioner disagreed with the district court's dismissal of the counterclaim, Petitioner could have sought review of the dismissal on appeal from the district court's judgment. See Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes § 641-1(a) (2016). Petitioner has not demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to relief, nor a lack of alternatives to obtain the relief sought. See Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP v. Kim, 153 Hawaiʻi 307, 319, 537 P.3d 1154, 1166 (2023). It is ordered that the petition for writs of mandamus and prohibition are denied. It is also ordered that the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed without prejudice. See Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 40.1(a)(1) (requiring an application for a writ of certiorari "be filed within 30 days after the filing of the intermediate court of appeals' judgment on appeal or dismissal order"). DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, April 22, 2026. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Todd W. Eddins /s/ Lisa M. Ginoza /s/ Vladimir P. Devens /s/ Michelle L. Drewyer

Named provisions

Writs of Prohibition and Mandamus Writ of Certiorari Jurisdiction Over Counterclaim

Get daily alerts for Hawaii Supreme Court

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from HI Supreme Court.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
HI Supreme Court
Filed
April 22nd, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Branch
Judicial
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Minor
Document ID
SCPW-25-0000584
Docket
SCPW-25-0000584 1DRC-25-0004620

Who this affects

Applies to
Criminal defendants Consumers
Industry sector
9211 Government & Public Administration
Activity scope
Extraordinary writs Appellate procedure Jurisdiction challenges
Geographic scope
US-HI US-HI

Taxonomy

Primary area
Judicial Administration
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Civil Rights

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when Hawaii Supreme Court publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!