Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Furusho

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-22-0000317 27-JUN-2022 02:12 PM Dkt. 20 OSUS SCAD-22-0000317 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, vs. CRAIG K. FURUSHO (Bar No. 1966), Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC Case Nos. 20-0248, 20-0257, 21-0229) ORDER (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.) Upon review of the May 3, 2022 petition, filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC), requesting this court, pursuant to Rule 2.12A of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH), to require Respondent Craig K. Furusho to show cause as to why he should not be immediately suspended from the practice of law for failing to cooperate with ODC in its lawful investigations into allegations of misconduct committed by him, this court’s May 18, 2022 order to show cause, its May 31, 2022 amended order to show cause, the lack of a response from Respondent Furusho, and the record in this matter, we conclude that granting the petition is warranted and supported by the record. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is granted. Respondent Furusho is suspended from the practice of law, effective immediately upon the filing of this order, and until further order of this court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order imposing suspension upon Respondent Furusho shall constitute a suspension for the purposes of RSCH Rule 2.16. The Disciplinary Board of the Hawai#i Supreme Court and Respondent Furusho shall therefore comply with the relevant requirements of that Rule. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to all judges, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.16(f). Distribution may be by electronic mail. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, June 27, 2022. /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.