History
  • No items yet
midpage
Schoettle v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel
SCPW-16-0000491
| Haw. | Jul 15, 2016
|
Check Treatment

*1

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-16-0000491 15-JUL-2016 10:04 AM

SCPW-16-000491

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

WALTER R. SCHOETTLE, Petitioner, vs.

THE OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, and RICHARD A. PLATEL, CHIEF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) Upon consideration of the May 10, 2016 petition for a writ of mandmamus submitted by Petitioner attorney Walter R. Schoettle, this court concludes nothing in the petition or the attached exhibits supports the conclusion that the Office of Disciplinary Counsel has violated a duty owed this court, or abused the discretion delegated to it by this court to investigate the allegations of misconduct lodged by the Petitioner. See Breiner v. Sunderland, 112 Hawai'i 60, 64-65, 143 P.3d 1262, 1266-67 (2006); In re Disciplinary Bd. of the

*2 Hawai'i Supreme Court, 91 Hawai'i 363, 368-71, 984 P.2d 688, 69396 (1999); Akinaka v. Disciplinary Bd. of the Hawai'i Supreme Court, 91 Hawai'i 51, 57, 979 P.2d 1077, 1083 (1999). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, July 15, 2016. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson

Case Details

Case Name: Schoettle v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel
Court Name: Hawaii Supreme Court
Date Published: Jul 15, 2016
Docket Number: SCPW-16-0000491
Court Abbreviation: Haw.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.