Opinion
SCPW-22-0000311
05-19-2022
LINDA MOLINA, Petitioner/Defendant/Counterclaimant-Appellant, v. CAROL GINOZA, President of Zen Properties, Incorporated, Appointed Property Manager of The Estate of Sheila Spencer Provost, a.k.a. Sheila Spencer, a.k.a. Shayla Spencer Provost, Deceased, Respondent/Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellee.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE. NO. 1DRC-21-0006827; APPEAL NO. CAAP-22-0000166)
Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Upon consideration of petitioner Linda Molina's petition for writ of mandamus, filed on May 1, 2022, the documents attached and submitted in support, and the record, petitioner has not demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to relief because petitioner has failed to show a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion or a lack of alternative means to seek relief. An extraordinary writ is thus not warranted. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai'i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (explaining that 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; such a writ is meant to restrain a judge who has exceeded the judge's jurisdiction, has committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or has refused to act on a subject properly before the court under circumstances in which the judge has a legal duty to act). Accordingly, It is ordered that the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.