Dellos v. Chang

CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 28, 2012
DocketSCPW-12-0000051
StatusPublished

This text of Dellos v. Chang (Dellos 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
Dellos v. Chang, (haw 2012).

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-12-0000051 28-FEB-2012 02:44 PM

NO. SCPW-12-0000051

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

RAQUEL A. DELLOSA, TARCILA J. DELA CRUZ, ANNALYN S. LAZARO,

and IDA P. OANDASAN, Petitioners,

vs.

THE HONORABLE GARY W.B. CHANG, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT

COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI'I and

OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(CIVIL NO. 09-1-1907-08)

ORDER

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioners Raquel A. Dellosa,

Tarcila J. Dela Cruz, Annalyn S. Lazaro, and Ida P. Oandasan's

petition for a writ of mandamus and the papers in support, it

appears that: (1) the respondent judge's December 22, 2011 order

compelling petitioners to submit to medical and psychological

examinations is reviewable on appeal from a final judgment

entered in Civil No. 09-1-1907-08 and (2) disallowing observation

or recording of the examinations and disallowing discovery of the

examiners' general income data are not extraordinary situations

warranting mandamus relief. Therefore, petitioners are 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. Such writs are not intended to

supersede the legal discretionary authority of the trial courts,

nor are they intended to serve as legal remedies in lieu of

normal appellate procedures.); Brende v. Hara, 113 Hawai'i 424,

429, 153 P.3d 1109, 1114 (2007) (Mandamus relief from discovery

orders is "available for extraordinary situations.").

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of

mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, February 28, 2012.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.

/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

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)
Brende v. Hara
153 P.3d 1109 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dellos v. Chang, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dellos-v-chang-haw-2012.