Reyes v. The Department of Public Safety, State of Hawaii

CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 8, 2015
DocketSCPW-15-0000869
StatusPublished

This text of Reyes v. The Department of Public Safety, State of Hawaii (Reyes v. The Department of Public Safety, State of Hawaii) 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.

Bluebook
Reyes v. The Department of Public Safety, State of Hawaii, (haw 2015).

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-15-0000869 08-DEC-2015 10:00 AM

SCPW-15-0000869

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

LAWRENCE REYES, Petitioner,

vs.

THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

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

Upon consideration of petitioner Lawrence Reyes’s

petition for a writ of mandamus, filed on November 6, 2015, it

appears that based on the record presented to this court,

petitioner fails to demonstrate that he has a clear and

indisputable right to work furlough status, that the respondent

has a duty to provide him work furlough status, or that the

respondent is violating its policies and procedures regarding the

grievance process. Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to the

requested writ of mandamus. 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); Barnett v. Broderick, 84 Hawai'i

109, 111, 929 P.2d 1359, 1361 (1996) (mandamus relief is

available to compel an official to perform a duty allegedly owed

to an individual only if the individual’s claim is clear and

certain, the official’s duty is ministerial and so plainly

prescribed as to be free from doubt, and no other remedy is

available). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of

mandamus is denied.

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the appellate clerks’

office shall process the petition for a writ of mandamus without

payment of the filing fee.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, December 8, 2015.

/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

Kema v. Gaddis
982 P.2d 334 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1999)
Barnett v. Broderick
929 P.2d 1359 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Reyes v. The Department of Public Safety, State of Hawaii, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reyes-v-the-department-of-public-safety-state-of-hawaii-haw-2015.