Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-14-0001329
02-FEB-2015
12:39 PM
SCPW-14-0001329
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
NORTH BEACH WEST MAUI BENEFIT FUND,
a Hawai#i non-profit corporation, Petitioner,
vs.
LAND COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I, ADMINISTRATIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE COURTS, and CHIEF STAFF ATTORNEY
OF THE SUPREME COURT, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(1 L.D. CASE NO. 12-1-3039)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon consideration of Petitioner North Beach West Maui
Benefit Fund’s petition for a writ of mandamus or other relief,
filed on December 1, 2014, the documents attached thereto and
submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that
Petitioner fails to demonstrate that it has a clear and
indisputable right to the requested relief or that it lacks
alternative means to seek relief. Petitioner, therefore, is not
entitled to the requested writ of mandamus. 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); Honolulu Advertiser, Inc.
v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241, 580 P.2d 58, 62 (1978) (a writ of
mandamus is not intended to supersede the legal discretionary
authority of the trial courts, cure a mere legal error, or serve
as a legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate procedure); Cir.
Ct. R. 2.2(1)(c); Haw. Ct. Rec. R. 10.18(b). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus or other relief is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 2, 2015.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
2