Shavelson v. Valenciano
This text of Shavelson v. Valenciano (Shavelson v. Valenciano) 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-14-0000452 19-MAR-2014 02:09 PM
SCPW-14-0000452
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
EILEEN SHAVELSON, Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE RANDAL G.B. VALENCIANO, JUDGE OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT, THE HONORABLE CRAIG H. NAKAMURA, and THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE M. REIFURTH, JUDGES OF THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (Civil No. 13-1-0137) ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ., and Circuit Judge Border, assigned by reason of vacancy.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Eileen Shavelson’s
petition for a writ of mandamus, filed on February 21, 2014, and
the record, it appears that petitioner is not entitled to the
requested writ of mandamus. Petitioner fails to demonstrate that
she has a clear and indisputable right to have the judges removed
from her case and petitioner has alternative means of seeking
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); Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241,
580 P.2d 58, 62 (1978) (a writ of mandamus is not intended to
supersede the legal discretionary authority of the trial courts,
cure a mere legal error, or serve as a legal remedy in lieu of
normal appellate procedure; rather, it is meant to restrain a
judge of an inferior court from acting beyond or in excess of his
or her jurisdiction). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate
court shall process the petition for a writ of mandamus without
payment of the filing fee.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a
writ of mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 19, 2014.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Patrick W. Border
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Shavelson v. Valenciano, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shavelson-v-valenciano-haw-2014.