Lighter v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel
This text of Lighter v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel (Lighter v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel) 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 22-NOV-2019 04:22 PM
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII ________________________________________________________________
ERIC LIGHTER, Petitioner,
vs.
THE OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Respondent. ________________________________________________________________
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ORDER (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon review of the October 9, 2019 petition for a writ
of mandamus filed by Petitioner Eric Lighter, seeking relief
against the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) with regard to
its September 27, 2019 decision, following review and
consultation with the Disciplinary Board of the Hawaii Supreme
Court (Board), to close its investigations into the conduct of
attorney Glenn N. Taga, in his capacity as trustee over the
legal practice of deceased attorney Gary M. Tsuji, pursuant to
Rule 2.20 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of
Hawaii (RSCH), and the October 16, 2019 motion by Petitioner Lighter to transfer this matter to the Intermediate Court of
Appeals, as an appeal from an agency decision, we note that ODC
and the Board are Acreatures of this court, created pursuant to
the court’s inherent and constitutional authority to regulate
the practice of law.@ See In re Disciplinary Bd. of Hawaii
Supreme Court, 91 Hawaii 363, 368, 984 P.2d 688, 693 (1999).
Furthermore, there is nothing in the record to indicate ODC or
the Board abused the discretion delegated to them by this court
in their handling of the matter. See id. at 370, 984 P.2d at
695. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to transfer is
denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, November 22, 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
Lighter v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lighter-v-office-of-disciplinary-counsel-haw-2019.