Barrett v. Thomas

Opinion

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