Noa v. Kawano ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                                        Electronically Filed
    Supreme Court
    SCPW-14-0001320
    04-DEC-2014
    09:14 AM
    SCPW-14-0001320
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
    HENRY M. NOA, Petitioner,
    vs.
    THE HONORABLE KELSEY T. KAWANO, Judge of the District Court
    of the Second Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,
    and
    STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.
    ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
    (CASE NO. 2DCW-14-0000523)
    ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
    (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
    Upon consideration of Petitioner Henry M. Noa’s
    petition for a writ of mandamus, filed on November 24, 2014, and
    the record, it appears that Petitioner fails to demonstrate that
    he has a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief,
    that he lacks alternative means to seek relief, or that the
    Respondent Judge committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of
    discretion in denying the motion to dismiss and setting the
    matter for trial.   Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to a
    writ of mandamus.   See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204, 
    982 P.2d 334
    , 338 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary
    remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a
    clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative
    means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the
    requested action); Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 
    59 Haw. 237
    , 241, 
    580 P.2d 58
    , 62 (1978) (a writ of mandamus is not
    intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the
    trial courts, cure a mere legal error, or serve as a legal remedy
    in lieu of normal appellate procedure; rather, it is meant to
    restrain a judge of an inferior court who has exceeded his or her
    jurisdiction, has committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of
    discretion, or has refused to act on a subject properly before
    the court under circumstances in which he or she has a legal duty
    to act).   Accordingly,
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
    mandamus is denied.
    DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, December 4, 2014.
    /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
    /s/ Paula A. Nakayama
    /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
    /s/ Richard W. Pollack
    /s/ Michael D. Wilson
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: SCPW-14-0001320

Filed Date: 12/4/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/4/2014