Miller-Kalama v. Hawk
This text of Miller-Kalama v. Hawk (Miller-Kalama v. Hawk) 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 12-JUL-2022 02:24 PM Dkt. 4 ODDP
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
MELITA M. MILLER-KALAMA and CY KALAMA, Petitioners,
vs.
THE HONORABLE JEFFREY HAWK, Judge of the District Court of the Third Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE NO. 3DRC-XX-XXXXXXX)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the petition for writ of
mandamus, filed on June 13, 2022, the documents attached and
submitted in support, and the record, the order granting the
motion to dismiss may be appealed, see HRS § 641-1(a), and a
notice of appeal from this order was filed in CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX.
The issuance of a writ of mandamus is not intended to supersede
the legal discretionary authority of the lower court, nor is it
meant to serve as a legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate
procedure. Petitioners have also not shown that Judge Hawk exceeded his jurisdiction, committed a flagrant and manifest
abuse of discretion, or refused to act on a subject properly
before the court under circumstances in which it has a legal duty
to act. An extraordinary writ is thus not warranted. See Kema
v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999)
(explaining that 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; such a writ is meant to restrain a judge who has exceeded
the judge’s jurisdiction, has committed a flagrant and manifest
abuse of discretion, or has refused to act on a subject properly
before the court under circumstances in which the judge has a
legal duty to act). Accordingly,
It is ordered that the petition for writ of mandamus is
denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, July 12, 2022.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
/s/ Todd W. Eddins
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Miller-Kalama v. Hawk, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-kalama-v-hawk-haw-2022.