Tierney v. Thomas
This text of Tierney v. Thomas (Tierney v. Thomas) 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
N0. 30636
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWA
MICHAEL C. TlERNEY, PetitiOner,
ties =z gsa z- snvalaz
VS.
LOREN J. THOMAS, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, City and County of Honolulu, 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 HawaiH_200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (l999) (A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue
unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right
pto 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 petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.
DATED: Hon@lulu, Hawai‘i,
August 2, 20lO.
¢W¢u4»tL1“T\a+LM4jLLhW@“ %3M\€.&wMM1%“ ma ¢-. A¢,¢,....,//
;§..f*` U
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Tierney v. Thomas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tierney-v-thomas-haw-2010.