Court Opinion

ID: 9897167
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-14 19:07:56.343859+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:49.346062
License: Public Domain

Electronically Filed
                                                        Supreme Court
                                                        SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
                                                        11-OCT-2023
                                                        09:02 AM
                                                        Dkt. 41 ODMR

                          SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX

          IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I

                    DOROTHY KULIK, Petitioner,

                                vs.

           COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT, Respondent,

                                and

                 THE HONORABLE MICHAEL K. SOONG,
        Judge of the District Court of the Fifth Circuit,
               State of Hawaiʻi, Respondent Judge.

                        ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
                          (5DTP-22-009571)

            ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
          (By: Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, and Eddins, JJ.,
           Circuit Judge Park and Circuit Judge Kawashima,
                  assigned by reason of vacancies)

     Upon consideration of the Fourth Supplemental Declaration

and appended exhibit, submitted by Petitioner Dorothy Kulik and

filed by the clerk in this matter on October 2, 2023, and the

record in both State v. Dorothy Kulik, 5DTP-22-009571 and the

instant case, most particularly the September 25, 2023 order of
this court, which denied Kulik’s petition and subsequent

Declarations, we deem the October 2, 2023 submission a motion

for reconsideration, timely submitted pursuant to Rule 40 of the

Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure.   Upon review, we conclude

the Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that this court

overlooked or misapprehended any facts or points of law that

would establish she has a clear and indisputable right to relief

from this court for the remedies she seeks.    See Kema v. Gaddis,

91 Hawaiʻi 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999)).   Therefore,

     It is odered that the motion for reconsideration is denied.

     It is further ordered that the denial of this instant

motion for reconsideration closes this case.   The clerk shall

not accept further filings in this case.

          DATED:   Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, October 11, 2023.

                                     /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

                                     /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

                                     /s/ Todd W. Eddins

                                     /s/ Shanlyn A.S. Park

                                     /s/ James S. Kawashima

                                 2