Ji v. Gangnes

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-16-0000322 04-MAY-2016 08:51 AM SCPW-16-0000322 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I SEONG HO JI and GX AUTO, INC., Petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE HILARY BENSON GANGNES, Judge of the District Court of the First Circuit, Honolulu Division, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge and KAALAWAI HOLDINGS LLC dba UNITED TRUCK RENTAL and SIONE VIMAHI aka SIONE VINMAHI, Respondents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CIV. No. 1RC15-1-7933) ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND/OR PROHIBITION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) Upon consideration of Petitioner Seong Ho Ji and GX Auto, Inc.’s petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition, filed April 7, 2016, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that petitioners fail to demonstrate that they have a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief or that they lack alternative means to seek relief. Petitioners, therefore, are not entitled to an extraordinary writ. 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); Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241, 580 P.2d 58, 62 (1978) (a writ of mandamus and a writ of prohibition are extraordinary remedies meant to, among other things, restrain a judge of an inferior court from acting beyond or in excess of his or her jurisdiction; they are not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the trial courts, cure a mere legal error, or serve as a legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate procedure). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, May 4, 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.