Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
12-MAR-2020
02:58 PM
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
KALIKO KANAELE; DEENA OANA-HURWITZ; ALIKA DESHA; GENE P.K. BURKE;
DESMON HAUMEA; PUALANI KANAKAOLE-KANAHELE; WALTER L. RITTE;
and LORETTA RITTE, Petitioners,
vs.
THE HONORABLE M. KANANI LAUBACH, Judge of the District Court of
the Third Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,
and
STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CASE NOS. 3DCC-XX-XXXXXXX, 3DCC-XX-XXXXXXX, 3DCC-XX-XXXXXXX,
3DCC-XX-XXXXXXX, 3DCC-XX-XXXXXXX, 3DCC-XX-XXXXXXX,
3DCC-XX-XXXXXXX, and 3DCC-XX-XXXXXXX)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioners’ petition for writ of
mandamus, filed on February 28, 2020, the documents attached
thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it
appears that petitioners fail to demonstrate that they have a
clear and indisputable right to the relief requested from this
court and that they lack alternative means to seek relief.
Petitioners, therefore, are not entitled to the requested
extraordinary writ. 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; such a writ is not intended to
supersede the legal discretionary authority of the lower court,
nor is it intended to serve as a legal remedy in lieu of normal
appellate procedures). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 12, 2020.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
2