Cullen v. Heely

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-15-0000952 20-JAN-2016 01:09 PM SCPW-15-0000952 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I PAUL KAUKA CULLEN, also known as PAUL KAUKA NAKI, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE ADRIANNE N. HEELY, JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT, MOLOKA#I DIVISION, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent Judge, and RICHARD P. PERREIRA and GWENDOLYN H. PERREIRA, Respondents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (DC CIVIL NO. 13-1-0122) ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) Upon consideration of petitioner Paul Kauka Cullen’s petition for a writ of mandamus, filed on December 24, 2015, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate that he has a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief or a lack of alternative means to seek relief at this time. Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to a writ of mandamus. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, January 20, 2016. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson 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.