From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McQueen v. Stephens

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Aug 31, 2010
No. 30687 (Haw. Aug. 31, 2010)

Opinion

No. 30687

August 31, 2010.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

By: MOON, C.J., NAKAYAMA, ACOBA, DUFFY, and RECKTENWALD, JJ.


ORDER

Upon consideration of petitioner Melvin B. McQueen, Jr.'s petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai'i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (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.). Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate court shall process the petition for a writ of mandamus without payment of the filing fee.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.


Summaries of

McQueen v. Stephens

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Aug 31, 2010
No. 30687 (Haw. Aug. 31, 2010)
Case details for

McQueen v. Stephens

Case Details

Full title:MELVIN B. McQUEEN, JR., Petitioner, v. TRAVIS J. L. STEPHENS, JR., DEPUTY…

Court:Supreme Court of Hawaii

Date published: Aug 31, 2010

Citations

No. 30687 (Haw. Aug. 31, 2010)