Tierney v. Akita
This text of Tierney v. Akita (Tierney v. Akita) 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
NO. 30637
lN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAl
8 %~Jd Z- OEWU!BZ
MlCHAEL C. TIERNEY, Petitioner, vS. 13 JESSICA AKlTA, Court Reporter, State of Hawaii, Respondent.
ORlGINAL PROCEEDlNG
(Cr. No. 08-l~O869) ORDER (By: Moon, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and Recktenwald, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Michael C. Tierney's
petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that petitioner fails
to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief. Kema v. Gaddis, 91 HawaiT_200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (l999) (A
writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue
;See
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.). Therefore,
lT lS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: 2010_
Hawai‘i , August 2 ,
w
AUALu@CLLr4LMDz{agn».
pratt/§
%¢»=-»@»@@» w /77"*,4 @. 4061 A¢,._,.,,,,_¢J
Honolulu,
UB'!!..-J
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Tierney v. Akita, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tierney-v-akita-haw-2010.