Colton v. Deweese
This text of Colton v. Deweese (Colton v. Deweese) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX 11-MAR-2022 11:51 AM Dkt. 5 ODDP SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
MARY LEE COLTON, Petitioner
vs.
THE HONORABLE WENDY M. DEWEESE, Judge of the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,
and
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWABS INC., ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007-11, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (Civil. No. 13-1-082K)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Mary Lee Colton’s
petition for writ of mandamus, filed on March 2, 2022, and the
record, petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable
right to the requested relief and has alternative means to seek
relief, including seeking relief on appeal from an appealable
order or judgment entered in Civil No. 13-1-082K, as provided by
law. Based on the record, it cannot be said that the respondent
judge exceeded the judge’s jurisdiction, committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or refused to act on a matter in
presiding over the case. An extraordinary writ is thus not
warranted. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204, 982 P.2d
334, 338 (1999) (explaining that 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; such a writ is meant to restrain a
judge who has exceeded the judge’s jurisdiction, has committed a
flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or has refused to act
on a subject properly before the court under circumstances in
which the judge has a legal duty to act). Accordingly,
It is ordered that the petition for writ of mandamus is
denied.
It is further ordered that the clerk of the appellate
court shall process the petition for writ of mandamus without
payment of the filing fee.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 11, 2022.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
/s/ Todd W. Eddins
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Colton v. Deweese, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colton-v-deweese-haw-2022.