NO. 29706
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I
GLENN NOBUKI MURAKAMI and ANN SUE ISOBE, Petitioners,
vs.
THE HONORABLE
EDEN ELIZABETH HIFO, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF THE
FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI‘I;
MICHAEL DAVID
SAKATANI; CHRISTINE MARIE
SAKATANI; and
808 DEVELOPMENT LLC, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIVIL NO.
03-1-1712)
ORDER
(By: Moon, C.J., Acoba, and Duffy, JJ., and Intermediate
Court of
Appeals Chief Judge Recktenwald, in place of
Nakayama, J.,
recused, and Intermediate Court of Appeals
Judge
Watanabe, assigned by reason of vacancy)
Upon consideration of the petition for a writ of mandamus and/or
prohibition filed by petitioners Glenn Nobuki Murakami
and Ann Sue Isobe and the papers in support, it appears that the
question of whether the respondent
judge was required to immediately determine the legal sufficiency of
the March 10,
2009 declaration of judicial disqualification is reviewable on appeal
from a final
order ending the post-judgment proceedings in Civil No. 03-1-1712.
Petitioners
can appeal from a final order pursuant to HRS § 641-1(a) (Supp.
2008). Consequently, petitioners' case is not one in which the question
of
disqualification cannot otherwise be reviewed and immediate review by
way of
mandamus and/or prohibition is not warranted. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai‘i
200,
204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (A writ of mandamus and/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.); Peters v.
Jamieson, 48 Haw. 247, 257, 397 P.2d 575, 582 (1964) ("[A]
writ of prohibition will lie to compel a trial judge to recuse him[ ]
or [her]self
because of bias or prejudice which appears from the record, where . . .
the case
is one in which the question of disqualification cannot otherwise be
reviewed."). Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition is
denied.
DATED: Honolulu,
Hawai‘i, April 7, 2009.