Case Title: Judges for Justice v. Nakamoto

Citation: 

Docket Number: SCPW-20-0000085

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2020-09-09T00:00:00Z

Document:
SCPW-20-0000085 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I JUDGES FOR JUSTICE, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE HENRY T. NAKAMOTO, Judge of the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge, and ALBERT IAN SCHWEITZER; STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (S.P. NO. 07-1-0007) ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION AND WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Wilson, JJ., and Circuit Judge Nakasone, assigned by reason of vacancy) Upon consideration of petitioner Judges for Justice’s petition for writ of prohibition and writ of mandamus, respondent Albert Ian Schweitzer’s answering brief, respondent State of Hawai#i’s answer, the respondent judge’s answer, the respective supporting documents, and the record, it appears that petitioner is currently seeking relief by way of an appeal in the Intermediate Court of Appeals in CAAP-20-0000374. Extraordinary relief is therefore not warranted. See Gannett Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-20-0000085 09-SEP-2020 08:53 AM Pac. Corp. v. Richardson, 59 Haw. 224, 226, 580 P.2d 49, 53 (1978) (a writ of prohibition is not meant to serve as a legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate procedures); 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). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of prohibition and writ of mandamus is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 9, 2020. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Michael D. Wilson /s/ Karen T. Nakasone 2