Ruh v. Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawaii

Hawaii Supreme Court

Ruh v. Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawaii

DecidedAugust 23, 2012

DocketSCPW-12-0000701

StatusPublished

This text of Ruh v. Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawaii (Ruh v. Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, 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

Ruh v. Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawaii, (haw 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-12-0000701 23-AUG-2012 01:07 PM

NO. SCPW-12-0000701

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

RICHARD RUH, Petitioner,

vs.

CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (S.P.P. 12-1-0003(2))

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.) Upon consideration of petitioner Richard Ruh’s August 8, 2012 petition for a writ of mandamus, the documents in support and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief and, therefore, is not entitled to mandamus relief. 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. Such writs are not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the lower courts, nor are they intended to serve as legal remedies in lieu of normal appellate procedures). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, August 23, 2012. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-12-0000701 23-AUG-2012 01:07 PM

NO. SCPW-12-0000701

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

RICHARD RUH, Petitioner,

vs.

CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (S.P.P. 12-1-0003(2))

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.) Upon consideration of petitioner Richard Ruh’s August 8, 2012 petition for a writ of mandamus, the documents in support and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief and, therefore, is not entitled to mandamus relief. 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. Such writs are not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the lower courts, nor are they intended to serve as legal remedies in lieu of normal appellate procedures). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, August 23, 2012. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ruh v. Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawaii, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruh-v-circuit-court-of-the-second-circuit-state-of-haw-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack