Woods v. Valenciano

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
20-FEB-2019
01:50 PM
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
_________________________________________________________________
VALERIE R. WOODS, individually and as Trustee of the VALERIE R.
WOODS TRUST DATED FEBRUARY 1, 2001, Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE RANDAL G. B. VALENCIANO, Judge of the Circuit Court
of the Fifth Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,
and
BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Respondent.
_________________________________________________________________
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX; CIV. NO. 13-1-0105)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION
(By: Nakayama, Acting C.J., McKenna, Pollack, Wilson, JJ., and Circuit
Judge Somerville, in place of Recktenwald, C.J., recused)
Upon consideration of petitioner’s petition for writ of
prohibition, filed on January 23, 2019, the documents attached
thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it
appears that petitioner is not entitled to the requested
extraordinary writ. There is no evidence that there is any
matter pending in the underlying circuit court proceeding that
questions the circuit court’s jurisdiction as it relates to the
appeal in CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX and that the circuit court will act in
excess of its jurisdiction sufficient to warrant the requested
writ. Moreover, petitioner may seek any appropriate relief in
the pending appeal. 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, February 20, 2019.
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
/s/ Rowena A. Somerville
2