Judd v. State of Hawaii Office of Elections

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-11-0001030 25-JAN-2012 01:49 PM NO. SCPW-11-0001030 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I KEITH RUSSELL JUDD, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF HAWAI'I OFFICE OF ELECTIONS, Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ORDER (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.) Upon consideration of petitioner Keith Russell Judd's petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to mandamus relief. See HRS § 602-5(3) (2010) ( The supreme court shall have jurisdiction and power . . . [t]o exercise original jurisdiction in all questions . . . arising under writs of mandamus directed to public officers to compel them to fulfill the duties of their offices[.] ); In re Disciplinary Bd. of Hawaii Supreme Court, 91 Hawai'i 363, 368, 984 P.2d 688, 693 (1999) (Mandamus relief is available to compel an official to perform a duty allegedly owed to an individual only if the individual s claim is clear and certain, the official s duty is ministerial and so plainly prescribed as to be free from doubt, and no other remedy is available.). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate court shall process the petition for writ of mandamus without payment of the filing fee. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 25, 2012. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ James E. Duffy, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.