January 24, 2013
JASON HESTER, AS SUCCESSOR OVERSEER OF THE OFFICE OF OVER/FOR THE POPULAR ASSEMBLY OF REVITALIZE, A GOSPEL OF BELIEVERS, RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF-COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT-APPELLEE,
LEONARD G. HOROWITZ, JACQUELINE LINDENBACH HOROWITZ, AND THE ROYAL BLOODLINE OF DAVID, PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS-COUNTERCLAIMANTS-APPELLANTS.
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-12-0001033 24-JAN-2013 10:34 AM
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Nakayama, Acting C.J., Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ., and Circuit Judge Trader, in place of Recktenwald, C.J., recused)
Upon consideration of petitioner Leonard G. Horowitz's petition for a writ of mandamus, which was filed on November 21, 2012, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that the relief petitioner seeks is not subject to a writ of mandamus. Petitioner is appealing the circuit court's damage award and can seek relief through separate court proceedings, as appropriate. Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to mandamus relief. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawaii 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (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). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Rom A. Trader
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.