Tim Sing v. Nacino

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-13-0000931
04-JUN-2013
09:06 AM
SCPW-13-0000931
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
STEPHANIE S.O. TIM SING,
Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE EDWIN C. NACINO, JUDGE OF THE FIRST
CIRCUIT COURT, STATE OF HAWAI#I; DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND
NATURAL RESOURCES, STATE OF HAWAI#I,
Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIV. NO. 12-1-2216)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Stephanie S.O. Tim
Sing’s petition for a writ of mandamus, the documents attached
thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it
appears that the remedy petitioner is seeking is not appropriate
by way of a petition for a writ of mandamus and petitioner has
alternative means to address the alleged wrong. Petitioner,
therefore, is not entitled to mandamus relief. See Kema v.
Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (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); Honolulu
Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241, 580 P.2d 58, 62
(1978) (a writ of mandamus is not intended to supersede the legal
discretionary authority of the trial courts, cure a mere legal
error or serve as a legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate
procedure; rather, it is meant to restrain a judge of an inferior
court from acting beyond or in excess of his or her
jurisdiction). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, June 4, 2013.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack