Brooks v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 24564 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI» I _________________________________________________________________ BETTY BUIE BROOKS, Petitioner, vs. OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Respondent. _________________________________________________________________ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (By: ORDER DISMISSING PETITION Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Ramil, and Acoba, JJ.) By letter dated August 24, 2001, complaining witness Betty Buie Brooks petitions for review of the dismissal of ODC 6731. The dismissal of ODC 6731 is not subject to review. See Rule 2, Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai» i; In re Disciplinary Board, 91 Hawai» 363, 368, 984 P.2d 688, 673 (1999) i ( Under Rule 2, complaining witnesses are not parties to disciplinary cases and they have no standing under Rule 2 to seek review of ODC or Disciplinary Board decisions ); cf. Akinaka v. Disciplinary Board, 91 Hawai» 51, 58, 979 P.2d 1077, 1084 (1999) i (complaining witness does not have standing to compel initiation of disciplinary proceedings). It further appears that Petitioner Brooks did not pay a filing fee for submission of her petition. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall file Brooks request as an original proceeding without prepayment of the filing fee. See HRS 607-3. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Brooks petition is dismissed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai» i, September 24, 2001.
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.
