Opinion
No. 29029
March 12, 2008.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CIV. NO. 07-1-0038)
ORDER
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.