Opinion
SCPW-15-0000194
05-15-2015
BRUCE ROBERT TRAVIS, Petitioner, v. STATE OF HAWAI'I DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS; REAL ESTATE COMMISSION; REGULATED INDUSTRIES COMPLAINT OFFICE; CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT; and INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CAAP-12-0000046; CIVIL NO. 11-1-1090)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDAMUS
()
Upon consideration of petitioner Bruce Robert Travis's petition for a peremptory writ of mandamus, filed March 23, 2015, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate that he has a clear and indisputable right to extraordinary relief or that he lacked alternative means to seek 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; Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241, 580 P.2d 58, 62 (1978) (a writ of mandamus is not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the trial courts, cure a mere legal error, or serve as a legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate procedure). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a peremptory writ of mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, May 15, 2015.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson