Tierney v. Prescott-Tate
This text of Tierney v. Prescott-Tate (Tierney v. Prescott-Tate) 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 30722 16-NOV-2010 02:05 PM
NO. 30722
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
MICHAEL C. TIERNEY, Petitioner,
vs.
DELANIE PRESCOTT-TATE, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ORDER (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ. and Circuit Judge Crandall, assigned by reason of vacancy)
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. 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.). Therefore,
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 FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, November 16, 2010.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.
/s/ Virginia L. Crandall
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Tierney v. Prescott-Tate, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tierney-v-prescott-tate-haw-2010.