Honolulu Civil Beat Inc. v. Crabtree

CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 25, 2019
DocketSCPW-19-0000622
StatusPublished

This text of Honolulu Civil Beat Inc. v. Crabtree (Honolulu Civil Beat Inc. v. Crabtree) 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
Honolulu Civil Beat Inc. v. Crabtree, (haw 2019).

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX 25-SEP-2019 02:00 PM

SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I _________________________________________________________________

HONOLULU CIVIL BEAT INC., Petitioner,

vs.

THE HONORABLE JEFFREY P. CRABTREE, Circuit Court Judge of the First Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,

and

STATE OF HAWAII ORGANIZATION OF POLICE OFFICERS (SHOPO), exclusive representative for Bargaining Unit 12, Police; and CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Respondents. _________________________________________________________________

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CIVIL NO. 18-1-0823-05)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioner Honolulu Civil Beat

Inc.’s petition for writ of mandamus, filed on September 5, 2019,

the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof,

and the record, it appears that an appeal is pending in CAAP-19-

0000450. Petitioner may seek relief through the appellate

process, as appropriate. Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled

to the requested writ of mandamus. 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; a writ of mandamus

is not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of

the trial courts, cure a mere legal error, or 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 25, 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

Kema v. Gaddis
982 P.2d 334 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Honolulu Civil Beat Inc. v. Crabtree, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/honolulu-civil-beat-inc-v-crabtree-haw-2019.