Disciplinary Board of the Hawai'i Supreme Court v. Kodani

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-21-0000561 01-NOV-2021 02:58 PM Dkt. 5 ORD SCAD-21-0000561 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE HAWAI#I SUPREME COURT, Petitioner, vs. ROY M. KODANI, (Bar No. 691), Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC NO. 16-O-226) ORDER OF TRANSFER TO INACTIVE STATUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.) Upon review of the October 14, 2021 petition filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel on behalf of, and with the approval of, the Disciplinary Board of the Hawai#i Supreme Court, requesting this court to transfer Respondent Roy M. Kodani to inactive status, pursuant to Rules 2.19(b) and 2.19(c) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH), we conclude transfer to inactive status is warranted. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Roy M. Kodani is transferred to inactive status in this jurisdiction, pursuant to RSCH Rules 2.19(b) and 2.19(c), effective with the filing of this order. Respondent Kodani shall remain on inactive status until further order of this court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ODC shall suspend and hold in abeyance proceedings against Respondent Kodani to the extent required by RSCH Rule 2.19(h). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Disciplinary Board shall, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.19(d) (2021), cause a notice of this transfer to inactive status to be published. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the clerk of the court, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.19(e), shall transmit a certified copy of this order to all judges of the State of Hawai#i and shall request their assistance and such action as may be indicated, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.20, to protect the interests of both Respondent Kodani and his clients, if any. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, November 1, 2021. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Michael D. Wilson /s/ Todd W. Eddins 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.