Taguinod v. Strance

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 26965 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I CHRISTIAN DAYLE TAGUINOD, Petitioner, vs. HONORABLE ELIZABETH A. STRANCE, Presiding Per Diem Judge of the Family Court of the Third Circuit, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, STATE OF HAWAI#I, ANGELA MAY HIGASHI, and COLBURN NAEHU, Respondents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (FC-S NO. 04-0094K) (By: ORDER Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.) Upon consideration of: (1) Petitioner Christian Dayle Taguinod s petition for a writ of mandamus directed to the presiding per diem judge of the Family Court of the Third Circuit in In the Interest of John Doe (DOB 9/24/95), FC-S 04-0094K, the papers in support and opposition; and (2) the motion to supplement the record and to dismiss the case filed by Respondent Department of Human Services, State of Hawai#i, the papers in support and opposition, it appears: (1) in the petition, Petitioner seeks a ruling that the family court erred when the court concluded Petitioner was not a party to the underlying family court proceeding concerning Petitioner s son and a ruling directing the family court to award custody of the boy to Petitioner and terminate the family court proceeding; (2) Respondent Department of Human Services agrees and does not contest Petitioner s assertion that the family court erred when it concluded Petitioner was not a party to the proceeding, see HRS ยงยง 587-2 and 587-32(a); (3) Petitioner was awarded custody of his son, and on January 23, 2005, the family court issued an order terminating family court jurisdiction; and (4) Petitioner has obtained the relief requested. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The motion to supplement the record with the Order Terminating Family Court Jurisdiction is granted. 2. The petition for a writ of mandamus is dismissed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 9, 2005. Elizabeth B. Croom for petitioner on the writ John P. Powell, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent Department of Human Services, State of Hawai#i on the motion 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.