Narrative Opinion Summary
Petitioner Keith Murauskas sought a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court of Hawai'i regarding an appeal to the circuit court. The court found that Murauskas did not possess a clear and indisputable right to appeal under HRCP Rule 72, as no statute allows for such a review of decisions made by the supreme court clerk's office. The court clarified that mandamus relief is only available when the individual's claim is clear and certain, the official's duty is ministerial and unequivocal, and no alternative remedy exists. Consequently, the petition for a writ of mandamus was denied. The appellate court clerk was instructed to process the petition without requiring a filing fee. The order was issued on January 25, 2012, by Chief Justice Mark E. Recktenwald and Justices Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna.
Legal Issues Addressed
Mandamus Reliefsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court emphasized that mandamus relief is not warranted because Murauskas did not have a clear and indisputable right to appeal, and the conditions for mandamus were not satisfied.
Reasoning: The court clarified that mandamus relief is only available when the individual's claim is clear and certain, the official's duty is ministerial and unequivocal, and no alternative remedy exists.
Processing of Petition without Filing Feesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court clerk was directed to process the petition without requiring a filing fee, indicating an exception to standard filing requirements.
Reasoning: The appellate court clerk was instructed to process the petition without requiring a filing fee.
Right to Appeal under HRCP Rule 72subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Murauskas's attempt to appeal was denied due to the absence of statutory provision for reviewing supreme court clerk's office decisions under HRCP Rule 72.
Reasoning: The court found that Murauskas did not possess a clear and indisputable right to appeal under HRCP Rule 72, as no statute allows for such a review of decisions made by the supreme court clerk's office.