Tierney v. District Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii ( 2012 )

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-11-0001091
25-JAN-2012
01:51 PM
NO. SCPW-11-0001091
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
MICHAEL C. TIERNEY, Petitioner,
vs.
DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI'I,
Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ORDER
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Michael C. Tierney's
petition for a writ of mandamus and the papers in support, it
appears that petitioner claims that the district court neglected
to file a notice of appeal that petitioner submitted for filing
in 1998 in Case No. Case No. 98306130. Petitioner provides no
evidence in support of his claim and fails to demonstrate a clear
and indisputable right to relief. Therefore, petitioner is not
entitled to mandamus relief. See HRS § 602-5(3) (2010) (“The
supreme court shall have jurisdiction and power . . . [t]o
exercise original jurisdiction in all questions . . . arising
under writs of mandamus directed to public officers to compel
them to fulfill the duties of their offices[.]”); In re
Disciplinary Bd. of Hawaii Supreme Court, 91 Hawai'i 363, 368,
984 P.2d 688, 693 (1999) (Mandamus relief is available to compel
an official to perform a duty allegedly owed to an individual
only if the individual’s claim is clear and certain, the
official’s duty is ministerial and so plainly prescribed as to be
free from doubt, and no other remedy is available.).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate
court shall process the petition for writ of mandamus without
payment of the filing fee.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 25, 2012.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
2