The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals has upheld a protection order against Sarita Knull, affirming a lower court's decision that found sufficient evidence of abuse against Nicole Robinson-Wells. This ruling, issued on October 16, 2026, is significant for those involved in domestic violence cases, as it highlights the importance of witness credibility in court decisions.

The case, Robinson-Wells v. Knull (CAAP-25-0000731), arose from a domestic dispute that escalated into violence. The court's decision affects both parties, particularly Robinson-Wells, who sought protection from Knull due to alleged abusive behavior. The ruling underscores the court's commitment to ensuring the safety of individuals in potentially dangerous situations.

Background

Nicole Robinson-Wells and Sarita Knull were involved in a domestic dispute that led Robinson-Wells to seek a protection order from the Family Court of the Third Circuit. The case was heard by Judge David R. Harada-Stone. The Family Court issued an Order For Protection (OFP) on October 16, 2025, after an evidentiary hearing where both Robinson-Wells and an eyewitness, Joy Modisett, testified. Knull did not testify during this hearing.

The dispute centered around allegations of physical abuse. Robinson-Wells claimed that Knull had attacked her, and Modisett provided testimony supporting this claim. Knull appealed the Family Court's decision, arguing that the court had made a mistake by finding the testimonies of Robinson-Wells and Modisett credible, despite alleged inconsistencies.

The Ruling

The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals reviewed the case and affirmed the Family Court's decision. The court ruled that the evidence presented, particularly Modisett's testimony, was credible and supported the issuance of the protection order. The court stated, "It is well-settled that an appellate court will not pass upon issues dependent upon the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence; this is the province of the trier of fact." This means that the appellate court respects the lower court's findings regarding witness credibility.

The court also addressed Knull's claims about inconsistencies in the testimonies. It noted that the Family Court had considered all evidence, including the testimony of Knull's rebuttal witness, Perrietta Edwards-Turner. The court found that Knull did not provide sufficient arguments to demonstrate that the Family Court abused its discretion in issuing the OFP.

Impact

This ruling has important implications for future domestic violence cases in Hawaii. It reinforces the idea that courts will rely heavily on witness credibility when making decisions in such cases. The ruling also emphasizes the need for clear and consistent testimony from witnesses, as discrepancies can be challenged but do not automatically invalidate a court's findings.

For individuals facing similar situations, this case highlights the importance of gathering reliable witness testimony and presenting a strong case to support claims of abuse. The court's decision may encourage more individuals to seek protection orders, knowing that credible witness testimony can significantly impact the outcome.

What's Next

While Knull has the option to appeal this ruling, the court's decision stands for now. There are no indications of related cases pending at this time. The court's affirmation of the protection order serves as a reminder of the legal protections available for victims of domestic violence in Hawaii.