Title: Murakami v. Hifo

State: hawaii

Issuer: Hawaii Supreme Court

Document:

No. 29682

 

id £1 wrsone

He

@
i
:
g
i
f
un

THE HONORABLE EDEN ELIZABETH HIFO, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAT'T,
JANELLE KUBO, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT,
STATE OF HAWAI'I; MICHAEL DAVID SAKATANI; CHRISTINE MARTE
‘SAKATANI) and 808 DEVELOPMENT LLC, Respondents.

 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIVIL No, 03-1-1712)

(By: Moony C.J., Acoba, and Duly, JJ., and Intermediate
Court of Appeals Chief Judge Recktenwald, in piace of
Nakayama, J., recused, and Intermediate Court of Appeals
Judge Watanabe, assigned by reason of vacancy}

Upon consideration of the petition for a writ of
prohibition filed by petitioners Glenn Nobuki Murakami and Ann
Sue Isobe and the papers in support, it appears that the
requirements of Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming 4 Wright, 76
Hawai'i 115, 864 P.2d 1334 (1994) do not apply to the July 29,
2008 judgment entered in Civil No. 03-1-1712 inasmuch as the
July 28, 2008 judgment was not entered pursuant to the separate
document requirement of HRCP 58, but was entered pursuant to HRS
§ 658A-25 (Supp. 2007) as a judgment on the July 29, 2008 order
granting the motion to confirm the June 5, 2008 arbitration
award. The July 29, 2008 judgment is @ judgment on the June 5,
2008 arbitration award and the judgment may be recorded, docketed,
and enforced. See HRS § 658A-25(a). Thus, petitioners are not
entitled to a writ of prohibition. See Kema vy. Gaddis, 91

Hawai'i 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (1999) (A writ of

 

 
prohibition 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 ol

 

in the requested action.). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
prohibition is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, March 13, 2009.

Gp
P77 NS

Womme, Dol n°
PV ©. Meh lexccel/

Bum Ke Watanabe