- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
In re: Simmons
Factual and Procedural Background
This original proceeding arose from Petitioner Kelvin Simmons’s petition for a writ of mandamus in Supreme Court case SCPW-25-0000511, related to circuit court case no. 1CCV-24-0000518. The petition was filed on July 14, 2025. [1][2][3][4]
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether Petitioner demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to mandamus relief. [5]
- Whether Petitioner lacked alternative means to seek the requested relief. [6]
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP v. Kim, 153 Hawaiʻi 307, 319, 537 P.3d 1154, 1166 (2023) | The opinion cites the decision in connection with the standard governing extraordinary writ relief. | The court relied on the precedent in concluding that an extraordinary writ was unwarranted. [7][8][9] |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
After considering the petition and the record, the court determined that Petitioner had not demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to relief. [10][4][5]
The court also found that Petitioner had not shown a lack of alternative means to obtain the requested relief. Because these requirements were not established, the court concluded that an extraordinary writ was unwarranted, citing Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP v. Kim. [5][6][7][9]
Holding and Implications
The petition for a writ of mandamus was denied. [11]
The direct effect was to deny Petitioner the requested extraordinary relief in this original proceeding. The opinion identifies no broader implications and did not announce a new precedent. [11]
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-25-0000511 01-SEP-2026 07:48 AM Dkt. 197 ODDP
SCPW-25-0000511
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI
IN RE KELVIN SIMMONS
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE NO. 1CCV-24-0000518)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Devens, C.J., McKenna, Eddins, and Ginoza, JJ.,
and Circuit Judge Hamman, assigned by reason of vacancy)
Upon consideration of the petition for writ of mandamus
filed July 14, 2025, and the record, Petitioner has not
demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to relief, nor a
lack of alternative means to seek the relief sought in this
original proceeding. An extraordinary writ is unwarranted. See
Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP v. Kim, 153 Hawaiʻi 307, 319, 537
P.3d 1154, 1166 (2023).
It is ordered that the petition is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, September 1, 2026.
/s/ Vladimir P. Devens
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Todd W. Eddins
/s/ Lisa M. Ginoza
/s/ Kirstin M. Hamman
Alert