Opinion
No. 29693
March 25, 2009.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CIVIL NOS. 98-4706, 98-5371, 07-1-0565)
Herbert R. Takahashi and Rebecca L. Covert of Takahashi Vasconcellos Covert for petitioner-appellant on the application.
By: MOON, C.J., NAKAYAMA, ACOBA, and DUFFY, JJ., and Circuit Judge HARA, assigned by reason of vacancy.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the petition for a writ of mandamus and prohibition filed on March 11, 2009 by petitioner Alexander Y. Marn and the papers in support, it appears that petitioner's claim that the respondent judge improperly authorized the interim payments of taxes, attorney's fees, and expenses is not clear and indisputable. The April 3, 2008, June 5, 2008, September 16, 2008, and December 22, 2008 orders are reviewable on appeal from final judgments entered in Civil Nos. 98-4706, 98-5371, and 07-1-0565. Thus, petitioner is not entitled to a writ of mandamus and prohibition. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai'i 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (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.).
It further appears that the March 11, 2009 petition cannot be treated as an application for a writ of certiorari to review the intermediate court of appeals' dismissal orders filed in Nos. 29421 and 29448 inasmuch as the petition does not meet the requirements of HRS § 602-59 (Supp. 2008) and HRAP 40.1. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus and prohibition is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for expedited review is denied.