Murauskas v. Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii ( 2012 )

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-11-0001018
25-JAN-2012
01:47 PM
NO. SCPW-11-0001018
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
KEITH MURAUSKAS, Petitioner,
vs.
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ORDER
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Keith Murauskas'
petition for a writ of mandamus and the papers in support, it
appears that petitioner has no clear and indisputable right to
appeal to the circuit court pursuant to HRCP Rule 72 inasmuch as
there is no statute that provides a right of review in the
circuit court of a decision or action of the supreme court
clerk's office. See HRCP Rule 72(a) ("Where a right of
redetermination or review in a circuit court is allowed by
statute, any person adversely affected by the decision, order or
action of a governmental official or body other than a court, may
appeal from such decision, order or action by filing a notice of
appeal in the circuit court having jurisdiction of the matter.")
(underscoring added). Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to
mandamus relief. See In re Disciplinary Bd. of Hawaii Supreme
Court, 91 Hawai'i 363, 368, 984 P.2d 688, 693 (1999) (Mandamus
relief is available to compel an official to perform a duty
allegedly owed to an individual only if the individual’s claim is
clear and certain, the official’s duty is ministerial and so
plainly prescribed as to be free from doubt, and no other remedy
is available.). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate
court shall process the petition for a writ of mandamus without
payment of the filing fee.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 25, 2012.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
2