In Re: Iaea

• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court
• Decided: December 1, 2023
• Docket: SCPW-23-0000603
• Status: Published

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX 01-DEC-2023 12:48 PM Dkt. 17 ORD

SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI ________________________________________________________________

IN RE KAIPOLANI ELIZABETH IAEA _____________________________________________________________

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Eddins, J., Circuit Judge Cahill, in place of McKenna, J., recused, Circuit Judge Kawamura and Circuit Judge Remigio, assigned by reason of vacancies)

Upon consideration of the submissions from Petitioner

Kaipolani Elizabeth Iaea, filed with this court on October 23,

2023 as a petition for a writ of mandamus, and the record, we

conclude the Petitioner failed to establish a clear and

indisputable right to the relief requested, and a lack of other

means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the

requested action. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawaiʻi 200, 204–05,

982 P.2d 334, 338–39 (1999).

It is ordered:

1. The petition is denied. 2. With respect to the sealed court filings at Docket 1,

Docket 2, and Docket 8, the appellate clerk shall file a

redacted version of these documents on the public record by

redacting the “Personal Information” including the social

security numbers and dates of birth in conformance with the

definition of “Personal Information” in Rule 2.19 of the Hawaiʻi

Court Records Rules. In addition, the appellate clerk shall

redact the copies of the letters from the Social Security

Administration, the Petitioner’s social security card, and the

Petitioner’s driver license, on the basis that the Petitioner’s

personal information is identified on these records. We also

find that Docket 1, page 2, paragraph 5 include reference to the

petitioner’s health and medical information, and to protect the

confidentiality of this information the first four-words and

date identified immediately after the paragraph 5 designation

shall be redacted. See, e.g., Pac. Radiation Oncology, LLC v.

Queen’s Med. Ctr., 138 Hawaiʻi 14, 19, 375 P.3d 1252, 1257 (2016)

(discussing the constitutional right to privacy).

The clerk shall file the redacted versions of Docket 1,

Docket 2, and Docket 8 on the record in this case as new

filings, and for the reasons stated above Docket 1, Docket 2,

and Docket 8 shall remain sealed. Any individual may file a

motion objecting to the sealing of these documents.

2 3. The appellate clerk shall process the petition without

payment of the filing fee, and the filing fees collected in this

proceeding shall be refunded.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, December 1, 2023.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

/s/ Peter T. Cahill

/s/ Shirley M. Kawamura

/s/ Catherine H. Remigio