Opinion
No. CAAP–12–0000817.
2015-06-17
SAU WAN SIN, Petitioner–Appellant, v. Jeff FUNG, Respondent–Appellee.
Doe v. Doe, 116 Hawai‘i 323, 327, 172 P.3d 1067, 1071 (2007) (citations and quotation marks omitted). Sin argues that her appeal qualifies under the public interest exception because (1) the process for filing a petition for a protective order is a matter of public concern; (2) the Family Court should not have unchecked discretion in deciding whether or not to consider a petition in its entirety; (3) the POFP form provided to the public must conform to the statutory requirements; and (4) as prospective petitioners frequently prepare statements regarding their experience of abuse without knowledge of the statutory requirements, there is a strong likelihood of future recurrence of this issue. (Emphasis added.)