Kelepolo v. Fernandez
This text of Kelepolo v. Fernandez (Kelepolo v. Fernandez) 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 SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX 02-NOV-2018 01:39 PM
SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
ANNETTE M. KELEPOLO, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
GRACIANO KEHOPU FERNANDEZ, NANCY FERNANDEZ, GRACE LYN W. FERNANDEZ-CHISHOLM, DAMIEN K. KAINA, JR., FRANK I. KAINA, JOSEPH T. KAINA, PATRICK KAINA, TAMARA SMITH-KAUKINI, Petitioners/Defendants-Appellants.
CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX; CIVIL NO. 16-1-0453(1))
ORDER DISMISSING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND DIRECTING ANSWER TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioners’ application for writ
of certiorari or in the alternative petition for writ of
mandamus, filed on September 5, 2018, respondent’s response to
the application for writ of certiorari, filed on October 3, 2018,
the respective supporting documents, and the record, it appears
that petitioner is seeking certiorari review of the Intermediate
Court of Appeals’ August 15, 2018 order granting in part the
motions for stay and the September 4, 2018 order denying the
motion for reconsideration or, in the alternative, a writ of
mandamus. The August 15, 2018 and September 4, 2018 orders are
not reviewable by the supreme court by application for a writ of certiorari. See HRAP 40.1(a); HRS §§ 602-5(a)(1) and 602-59(a).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. As to the request for certiorari review, the
application for a writ of certiorari is dismissed.
2. As to the request for mandamus relief:
a. Within twenty (20) days from the date of this
order, the respondent shall file an answer to the petition.
b. The appellate clerk shall serve a copy of
this order upon the respondent as required by HRAP Rule 21(c).
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, November 2, 2018.
/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
Kelepolo v. Fernandez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelepolo-v-fernandez-haw-2018.