NO. 29029
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I
BIENVENIDO C. CABANTING, as
Guardian Prochein Ami
of ALEXIS LOKAHI LEHMAN-CABANTING, a Minor, andRONNIE B.
CABANTING, Petitioners,
vs.
THE HONORABLE GLENN S. HARA,
JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI‘I,HYACINTH L.
POOUAHI, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,
STATE OF HAWAI‘I, and DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
STATE OF HAWAI‘I, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIV. NO. 07-1-0038)
ORDER
(By: Moon, C.J.,
Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the petition for a writ of mandamus filed by
petitioners Bienvenido Cabanting, as Guardian Prochein Ami of Alexis
Lokahi Lehman-Cabanting, a minor, and Ronnie Cabanting
and the papers in support, it appears that the question of the
disqualification of the presiding judge is not a question that cannot
otherwise be reviewed on petitioners' appeal from a final judgment
entered in Civil No. 07-1-0038. Therefore, petitioners are not entitled
to extraordinary relief. See
Peters v. Jamieson, 48
Haw. 247, 257, 397 P.2d 575, 582 (1964) (A writ of prohibition will lie
to
compel the disqualification of a trial judge where the question of
disqualification cannot otherwise be reviewed.); Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai‘i
200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (A writ of mandamus
or prohibition 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. Such writs are not intended to
supersede the legal discretionary authority of the lower courts, nor
are they intended to serve as legal remedies in lieu of normal
appellate procedures.). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu,
Hawai‘i, March 12, 2008.