Ogeone v. Castagnetti
This text of Ogeone v. Castagnetti (Ogeone v. Castagnetti) 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-17-0000018 27-JAN-2017 02:09 PM
SCPW-17-0000018
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
GALINA OGEONE, Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE JEANNETTE CASTAGNETTI, Judge of the Circuit Court
of the First Circuit, State of Hawai'i, Respondent Judge,
and
DENTIST LESLIE AU, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIV. NOS. 16-1-1347-7 and 16-1-1348-7)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Galina Ogeone’s
petition for writ of mandamus, filed on January 13, 2017, the
documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and
the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate that
the respondent judge exceeded her jurisdiction or committed a
flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion in ruling on the
underlying motions or not disqualifying herself from the
underlying case. Further, petitioner fails to demonstrate that
she has a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief or
that she lacks alternative means to seek relief. Petitioner,
therefore, is not entitled to the requested writ of mandamus.
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; where a court has discretion to act, mandamus will not
lie to interfere with or control the exercise of that discretion,
even when the judge has acted erroneously, unless the judge has
exceeded his or her 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 he or she
has a legal duty to act). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 27, 2017.
/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
Ogeone v. Castagnetti, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ogeone-v-castagnetti-haw-2017.