Slavick v. Halawa Correctional Facility Administrative Staff

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-21-0000592 27-DEC-2021 11:04 AM Dkt. 4 ODDP SCPW-21-0000592 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I CHRIS SLAVICK, Petitioner vs. HALAWA CORRECTIONAL FACILITY ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF; GARY KAPLAN; JAN MOLINA; LYLE ANTONIO; SCOTT HARRINGTON; ALICIA TORRES; MONICA CHUN; and CALVIN MOCK, Respondents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE NO. 1PC041001534; CAAP-20-0000076) ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.) Upon consideration of the petition for writ of mandamus filed by petitioner Christopher Lee Slavick, it appears that, based on the information presented, petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief or that respondents are refusing to perform a clear and precise duty that is owed to petitioner. is not entitled to an extraordinary writ. Petitioner, therefore, 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); Barnett v. Broderick, 84 Hawai#i 109, 111, 929 P.2d 1359, 1361 (1996) (mandamus relief is available to compel an official to perform a duty allegedly owed to an individual only if the individual’s claim is clear and certain, the official’s duty is ministerial and so plainly prescribed as to be free from doubt, and no other remedy is available). Accordingly, It is ordered that the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. It is further ordered that the clerk of the appellate court shall process the petition for writ of mandamus without payment of the filing fee. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, December 27, 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.