Barrett v. Thomas

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
30-SEP-2022
02:47 PM
Dkt. 6 ODDP
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
GUY BARRETT; and RONETTE BARRETT, Petitioners,
vs.
THE HONORABLE THOMAS A.K. HAIA,
Judge of the District Court of the First Circuit,
State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,
and
MERVINA CASH-KAEO, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CASE NO. 1DRC-XX-XXXXXXX)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the petition for a writ of
mandamus, filed on September 29, 2022, the documents attached and
submitted in support, and the record, Petitioners have
alternative means to seek relief by seeking a stay in the
Intermediate Court of Appeals in CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, which is the
appeal of the underlying proceeding. See Hawai#i Rules of
Appellate Procedure Rule 8(a). Additionally, the Respondent
Judge is not required to recuse himself merely because
Petitioners disagree with the Respondent Judge’s decisions. See
Aga v. Hundahl, 78 Hawai#i 230, 242, 891 P.2d 1022, 1034 (1995)
(“[W]e have long adhered to the general rule that, standing
alone, ‘mere erroneous or adverse rulings by the trial judge do
not spell bias or prejudice[.]’” (Quoting Peters v. Jamieson, 48
Haw. 247, 264, 397 P.2d 575, 586 (1964)). An extraordinary writ
is thus not warranted. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204-
05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (1999). Accordingly,
It is ordered that the petition is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 30, 2022.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
/s/ Todd W. Eddins
2