84 Hawai'i 109, Barnett v. Broderick

• Decision Date: 23 December 1996
• Docket Number: No. 20185,20185
• Citation: 929 P.2d 1359
• Parties: 84 Hawai'i 109 Gregory P. BARNETT, Petitioner, v. Michael BRODERICK, Administrative Director of the Courts, Nathaniel H.C. Kim, Chief Court Administrator of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, Riley Yamada, Court Administrator, Legal Document Branch of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, and Stanley Ikeda, Document Supervisor of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawai'i, Respondents.
• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Page 1359

929 P.2d 1359

84 Hawai'i 109

Gregory P. BARNETT, Petitioner, v. Michael BRODERICK, Administrative Director of the Courts Nathaniel H.C. Kim, Chief Court Administrator of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, Riley Yamada, Court Administrator, Legal Document Branch of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, and Stanley Ikeda, Document Supervisor of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawai'i, Respondents.

No. 20185.

Supreme Court of Hawai'i.

Dec. 23, 1996.

Gregory Barnett, Aiea, pro se.

Marjory S. Bronster, Attorney General, Russell A. Suzuki and Susan L. Gochros, Deputy Attorneys General, Honolulu, for respondents.

Before MOON, C.J., and KLEIN, LEVINSON, NAKAYAMA and RAMIL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

In this original proceeding, the petitioner Gregory Barnett, an inmate at Halawa Correctional Facility who is proceeding pro se, petitions this court for a writ prohibiting the circuit court from continuing the policy regarding the filing of documents filed by inmates.

Based upon the following, we conclude that the unwritten internal policy of the circuit court regarding prisoner documents was in violation of this court's November 22, 1995 order implementing a demonstration pilot project about the filing of documents presented for filing. ¹

I. BACKGROUND

Barnett is representing himself in a civil action in the circuit court. In response to a September 13, 1996 inquiry regarding the status of two motions submitted on August 21 and August 22, 1996, Barnett was informed by the Documents Supervisor that the motions were forwarded to the motions judge for review, clarification, and action before filing. ² In response to a September 24, 1996 inquiry, Barnett was told that all prisoner documents submitted to the circuit court must be screened before filing. ³ On September 23, 1996, Barnett wrote to the Administrative Director of the Courts regarding the filing delays. The letter was referred to the Chief Court Administrator of the First Circuit Court, who informed Barnett that the documents were filed on September 23, 1996, one month after they were submitted. The Court Administrator also informed Barnett that the present process was being reviewed.

Thereafter, Barnett filed the instant petition asking this court to prohibit the circuit court practice regarding the handling of prisoner documents. In response to our order, the respondents submitted an answer stating the the circuit court has no written policy or procedure regarding the filing of documents submitted by prison inmates. In his affidavit, the Court Administrator for the Legal Documents Branch stated as follows:

I have researched whether there are any written policies or procedures at the Circuit Court of the First Circuit regarding the filing of documents submitted by prison inmates and have found no such written procedures or policies. However, prior to September 1996, there was an internal understanding within the Circuit Court of the First Circuit that any questionable documents presented for filing required prior review and approval by the motions or administrative judge before the document could be file-marked at the Legal Documents Branch. Accordingly, in cases involving prisoner litigants filing questionable documents (who are not physically able to present their documents to the judges) the Legal Documents Branch would route their documents to the motions or administrative judge for review and approval prior to filing such documents. However, this policy was reconsidered in light of the Hawai'i Supreme Court's November 22, 1995 ("No Bounce") order, and was terminated as a practice as of September, 1996.

II. STANDARD FOR DISPOSITION

A writ of mandamus and/or prohibition will not issue unless a petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of other means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action. Straub Clinic & Hospital v. Kochi, 81 Hawai'i 410, 414, 917 P.2d 1284, 1288 (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. Azurin v. Von Raab, 803 F.2d 993 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 483 U.S. 1021, 107 S.Ct. 3264, 97 L.Ed.2d 763 (1987).

III. DISCUSSION

Barnett contends that he has a right of access to the courts and that the right includes timely filing of documents submitted in the cases in which he is representing himself. Rule 2(b) of the Rules of the Circuit Court of the State of Hawai'i (RCCH) provides that "the clerk shall promptly stamp the time and date of all papers filed." Although RCCH 3(e) provides that the clerks shall not accept for filing any papers that do not comply with the circuit court form requirements without court approval, the clerks in the instant case should have filed the documents when received.

To insure that all documents are filed regardless of form, on November 22, 1995, this court issued an order implementing a pilot project directing that the circuit court clerks "shall not refuse to accept for filing any documents not presented in the proper form," with certain exceptions not applicable in this case. See supra note 1. Despite this order, the circuit court continued an internal, unwritten policy that any questionable documents required prior review and approval by the motions or administrative judge. This policy was in direct contravention of our ...