Onepo‘okelaoiai‘oa‘okekaulaoezekiela Craig-Rodenhurst v. Okamoto

• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court
• Decided: August 8, 2012
• Docket: SCPW-12-0000665
• Status: Published

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-12-0000665 08-AUG-2012 01:24 PM

NO. SCPW-12-0000665

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

ONEPO'OKELAOIAI'OA'OKEKAULAOEZEKIELA SUGAR

CRAIG-RODENHURST, aka POOKELA, Petitioner,

vs.

THE HONORABLE MAURA M. OKAMOTO, JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT

COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(CITATION NO. 1DT1-12-0093484)

ORDER

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)

Upon consideration of O.S. Craig-Rodenhurst’s “Affidavit of Truth”, which we treat as a petition for writ of mandamus, it appears that Hawaii Revised Statutes chapter 291D and Hawaii Civil Traffic Rules 18 and 19 provide the available remedies to seek a review of the May 14, 2012 default judgment. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to mandamus relief. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai'i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (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). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate

court shall process the petition for a writ mandamus without

payment of the filing fee.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of

mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, August 8, 2012. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack