Tierney v. Rodby
This text of Tierney v. Rodby (Tierney v. Rodby) 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-11-0000109 10-MAR-2011 12:38 PM
NO. SCPW-11-0000109
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
MICHAEL C. TIERNEY, Petitioner,
vs.
WALTER RODBY, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(Nos. 29993 and SCWC-29993)
ORDER
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Michael C. Tierney’s
petition for a writ of mandamus and the papers in support, it
appears that mandamus does not lie against petitioner’s court-
appointed counsel. See HRS § 602-5(3) (2010) (“The supreme court
shall have jurisdiction and power . . . [t]o exercise original
jurisdiction in all questions arising under writs directed to
courts of inferior jurisdiction and returnable before the supreme
court, or if the supreme court consents to receive the case
arising under writs of mandamus directed to public officers to
compel them to fulfill the duties of their offices[.]”
Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is dismissed.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, March 10, 2011.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Tierney v. Rodby, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tierney-v-rodby-haw-2011.