Opinion
SCPW-23-0000373
08-10-2023
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE NO. 1CCV-22-0001614)
Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, and Eddins, JJ., Circuit Judge Cahill and Circuit Judge Kawano, assigned by reason of vacancies
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND/OR PROHIBITION
Upon consideration of the "Petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition," filed on June 1, 2023 (Petition), the documents attached and submitted in support, and the record, Petitioners Sandee Kim Villeza and Brent Ian Villeza failed to establish a "clear and indisputable right to the relief requested and a lack of other means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or to obtain the requested action." See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai'i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999).
Here, Petitioners are defendants to the foreclosure complaint in civil number 1CCV-22-0001614 and may raise and establish their defenses in that proceeding and, if necessary, may appeal. See Hawai'i Revised Statutes § 667-51(a)(1). We find that mandamus to address the question raised in the Petition is, thus, not warranted because "[s]uch writs are not meant to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the lower court, nor are they meant to serve as legal remedies in lieu of normal appellate procedures." Kema, 91 Hawai'i at 204, 982 P.2d at 338.
It is ordered that the Petition is denied.