Falle v. Castagnetti
This text of Falle v. Castagnetti (Falle v. Castagnetti) 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 16-SEP-2019 01:52 PM
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
JOSE GARFIN FALLE and JOSETTE VEGAFRIA FALLE, Petitioners, vs.
THE HONORABLE JEANNETTE H. CASTAGNETTI, Judge of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,
and
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA BANK OF NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS (CWABS2004-04)GI ARM; DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CIV. NO. 14-1-1480-06)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioners Jose Garfin Falle and
Josette Vegafria Falle’s “Real Emergency Petition for a Writ of
Mandamus Enjoining Honorable Judge Jeannette H. Castagnetti from
Enforcing a Void Judgment Including Writ of Ejectment,” filed on
September 4, 2019, the documents attached thereto and submitted
in support thereof, and the record, it appears that petitioners
fail to demonstrate that they have a clear and indisputable right
to the relief requested from this court and that they lack
alternative means to seek relief. Petitioners, therefore, are not entitled to the requested extraordinary writ. See Kema v.
Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (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 a writ is
not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of
the lower court, nor is it intended to serve as a legal remedy in
lieu of normal appellate procedures). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 16, 2019.
/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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Falle v. Castagnetti, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/falle-v-castagnetti-haw-2019.