Iwasaki v. Sakamoto

• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court
• Decided: June 23, 2020
• Docket: SCPW-16-0000143
• Status: Published

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX 23-JUN-2020 01:41 PM

SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

ALAN IWASAKI, Petitioner,

vs.

NELSON SAKAMOTO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES, RESEARCH CORPORATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

Upon consideration of petitioner Alan Iwasaki’s petition for writ of mandamus, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that petitioner is not entitled to the requested extraordinary relief. 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); Barnett v. Broderick, 84 Hawai#i 109, 111, 929 P.2d 1359, 1361 (1996) (with respect to a public official, mandamus relief is available to compel an official to perform a duty allegedly owed to an individual only if the individual’s claim is clear and certain, the official’s duty is ministerial and so plainly prescribed as to be free from doubt, and no other remedy is available); Salling v. Moon, 76 Hawai#i 273, 274 n.3, 874 P.2d 1098, 1099 n.3 (1994) (“A duty is ministerial where the law prescribes and defines the duty to be performed with such precision and certainty as to leave nothing to the exercise of discretion and judgment.”). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, June 23, 2020. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson