Keen v. Loo ( 2019 )

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
11-MAR-2019
09:59 AM
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
_________________________________________________________________
HENRIQUE D. KEEN and PRESILLA E. KEEN, Petitioners,
vs.
THE HONORABLE RHONDA I. L. LOO, Judge of the Circuit Court of the
Second Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,
and
WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, D/B/A CHRISTIANA TRUST AS
OWNER TRUSTEE OF THE RESIDENTIAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES TRUST III,
Respondent.
_________________________________________________________________
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIV. NO. 13-1-0784(1))
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioners Henrique D. Keen and
Presilla D. Keen’s petition for writ of prohibition, filed on
March 5, 2019, the documents attached thereto and submitted in
support thereof, and the record, it appears that petitioners fail
to demonstrate that they are entitled to the requested writ of
prohibition or that they lacked alternative means to seek relief.
See Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241, 580
P.2d 58, 62 (1978) (a writ of prohibition “is an extraordinary
remedy . . . to restrain a judge of an inferior court from acting
beyond or in excess of his jurisdiction”); Gannett Pac. Corp. v.
Richardson, 59 Haw. 224, 226, 580 P.2d 49, 53 (1978) (a writ of
prohibition is not meant to serve as a legal remedy in lieu of
normal appellate procedures; rather, it is available in “rare and
exigent circumstances” where “allow[ing] the matter to wend its
way through the appellate process would not be in the public
interest and would work upon the public irreparable harm”).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of
prohibition is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 11, 2019.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
2