Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-14-0000340
12-FEB-2014
08:52 AM
SCPW-14-0000340
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
A.B., Petitioner,
vs.
THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(ODC Case Nos. 11-009-8933, 11-042-8966)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the January 10, 2014 petition for
a writ of mandamus submitted on behalf of Petitioner attorney
“A.B.” by attorney Samuel P. King, it appears the Petitioner has,
by way of Rule 25(b)(iii) of the Rules of the Disciplinary Board,
an alternate means to obtain relief and, therefore, that a
petition for a writ of mandamus is inappropriate. See Kema v.
Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (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). It further
appears that, insofar as the Board has determined the imposition
of a private, informal admonition might be appropriate in the
present matter, it is reasonable to classify as confidential,
until further order of this court, both the present petition and
the underlying disciplinary proceedings. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Disciplinary Board, the
Office of Disciplinary Counsel, and the clerk of this court shall
classify the materials relating to A.B.’s disciplinary
proceedings as confidential until further order of this court
and, further, that A.B.’s motion to proceed anonymously is
denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 12, 2014.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack