Dejean v. Chang

CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 23, 2014
DocketSCPW-14-0001155
StatusPublished

This text of Dejean v. Chang (Dejean v. Chang) 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.

Bluebook
Dejean v. Chang, (haw 2014).

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-14-0001155 23-OCT-2014 12:52 PM

SCPW-14-0001155

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

KHISTINA CALDWELL DEJEAN, Petitioner,

vs.

GARY W.B. CHANG, JUDGE OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT,

STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondent Judge,

and

SCOTT T. NAGO, Chief Election Officer; OFFICE OF ELECTIONS;

AARON SCHULANER, General Counsel, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(CIV. NO. 14-1-001348)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Petitioner Khistina Caldwell

DeJean’s petition for a writ of mandamus, filed on October 3,

2014, the respective supporting documents, and the record, it

appears that Petitioner fails to demonstrate that she has a clear

and indisputable right to stop the 2014 general election and have

her name included on the ballot as a candidate for governor. See

Haw. Const. art. V, sec. 2 (“The lieutenant governor shall be

elected at the same time, for the same term and in the same

manner as the governor[.]”); Hirono v. Peabody, 81 Hawai'i 230,

915 P.2d 704 (1996) (a candidate for governor must seek the

nomination to the office with a candidate for lieutenant governor

from the same political party); HRS § 12-8 (2009 & Supp. 2013).

Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to the requested writ of

mandamus. 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). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of

mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, October 23, 2014.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kema v. Gaddis
982 P.2d 334 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1999)
Hirono v. Peabody
915 P.2d 704 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dejean v. Chang, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dejean-v-chang-haw-2014.