Galmiche v. Chang ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                         Electronically Filed
    Supreme Court
    SCPW-15-0000716
    23-DEC-2015
    02:36 PM
    SCPW-15-0000716
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
    HELEN LANI GALMICHE, as Trustee of the Revocable
    Trust of Helen Lani Galmiche, Petitioner,
    vs.
    THE HONORABLE GARY W.B. CHANG, Judge of the Circuit Court
    of the First Circuit, State of Hawai'i, Respondent Judge,
    and
    MELVIN JAMES GALMICHE, SR., as Trustee of the Melvin James
    Galmiche Trust, and WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Respondents.
    ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
    (CIVIL NO. 13-1-0842-03)
    ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
    (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, J.J.)
    Upon consideration of petitioner’s petition for a writ
    of mandamus, filed on October 2, 2015, the documents attached
    thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it
    appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate that she has a clear
    and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means
    to seek relief as petitioner may seek relief, as appropriate,
    once a final, appealable judgment is entered in the case.
    Additionally, petitioner fails to demonstrate that the respondent
    judge has exceeded his jurisdiction or committed a flagrant and
    manifest abuse of discretion in presiding over the partition
    action.   See HRS § 668-1 (governing actions for partition).
    Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to the relief requested.
    See Kema v. Gaddis, 
    91 Hawai'i 200
    , 204-05, 
    982 P.2d 334
    , 338-39
    (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; such a writ 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 23, 2015.
    /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-15-0000716

Filed Date: 12/23/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/24/2015