February 9, 2012
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, RESPONDENT.
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-11-0001085 09-FEB-2012 11:42 AM
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)
Upon review of the letters to the Chief Justice and Associate Justices submitted by Petitioner Benjamin Acuna concerning the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) and Petitioner Acuna's counsel Emmanuel V. Tipon, which we consider as a petition for a writ of mandamus, materials submitted by ODC in response to our December 27, 2011 order, and the record, it appears that ODC did not abuse its discretion in the matter. See In re Disciplinary Board of the Hawaii Supreme Court, 91 Hawaii 363, 368, 370-71, 984 P.2d 688, 693, 695-96 (1999). It further appears that Petitioner Acuna's request regarding the files in the possession of attorney Tipon is moot. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.