Hanes v. Gangnes ( 2018 )

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-18-0000466
15-JUN-2018
08:38 AM
SCPW-18-0000466
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
OKHOO HANES, Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE HILARY B. GANGNES, Judge of the
District Court of the First Circuit, Respondent Judge,
and
SCOTTRADE, INC. and ED BARAOIDAN, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIV. NO. 1SC17-1-2015)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
AND/OR PROHIBITION
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ., and
Circuit Judge Browning, in place of McKenna, J., recused)
Upon consideration of petitioner Okhoo Hanes’s petition
for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition, filed on June 1, 2018,
the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof,
and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate
that she is entitled to the requested relief sought by way of an
extraordinary writ. See HRS §§ 633-27 and 633-28; 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 and a writ of prohibition are
extraordinary remedies meant to, among other things, restrain a
judge of an inferior court from acting beyond or in excess of his
or her jurisdiction; they are not intended to supersede the legal
discretionary authority of the trial courts or cure a mere legal
error). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of
mandamus and/or prohibition is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, June 15, 2018.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
/s/ R. Mark Browning
2