From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Himalaya-Fidele v. Blondin

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Apr 20, 2009
No. 29724 (Haw. Apr. 20, 2009)

Opinion

No. 29724

April 20, 2009.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CIVIL NO. 08-1-1478)

By: Moon, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ. and Intermediate Court of Appeals Judge Watanabe, assigned by reason of vacancy.


ORDER

Upon consideration of the petition for a writ of prohibition filed by petitioner Carol Jean Himalaya-Fidele and the papers in support, it appears that the granting and entry of a writ of ejectment is immediately appealable pursuant to HRS § 641-1(a) (Supp. 2008).See Penn v. Transportation Lease Haw., Ltd., 2 Haw. App. 272, 274, 630 P.2d 646, 649 (1981); Ciesla v. Reddish, 78 Hawai'i 18, 889 P.2d 702 (1995). Petitioner can appeal from a writ of ejectment and can seek a stay of the writ pending appeal pursuant to HRAP 8. Thus, petitioner is not entitled to extraordinary relief. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai'i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (A writ of 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 prohibition is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, April 20, 2009.


Summaries of

Himalaya-Fidele v. Blondin

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Apr 20, 2009
No. 29724 (Haw. Apr. 20, 2009)
Case details for

Himalaya-Fidele v. Blondin

Case Details

Full title:CAROL JEAN HIMALAYA-FIDELE, Petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE KAREN N. BLONDIN…

Court:Supreme Court of Hawaii

Date published: Apr 20, 2009

Citations

No. 29724 (Haw. Apr. 20, 2009)