Mariano et al v. Bank of Hawaii et al

Filing 45

ORDER REGARDING COUNSEL FOR ALEJANDRO B. MARIANO, JR. re 18 , 22 , 25 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 8/12/2015. "This court will defer its ruling on the pending dispositive motions until the court has completed attempts to find pro bono counsel." (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Elvira R. Mariano and Alejandro B. Mariano, Jr. served by first class mail at the address of record on August 12, 2015.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
vs.
)
)
)
BANK OF HAWAII; PETER HO;
)
RICK MURPHY; RAECHELLE
)
HESTER; SUI LIM; MITZI A.
)
LEE; LORRIN A KAU; JEROME
)
ADARNA; DEPARTMENT OF
)
COMMERCE; JOHN DOES; JANE
DOES; DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS, )
)
DOE NON-PROFIT CORPORATION;
)
AND DOE CORPORATIONS,
)
)
Defendants.
_____________________________ )
ELVIRA R. MARIANO AND
ALEJANDRO B. MARIANO, JR.;
AND ESTATE OF CRISOSTOMO R.
RAGUINE, DECEASED,

CIV. NO. 15-00087 SOM-BMK
ORDER REGARDING COUNSEL FOR
ALEJANDRO B. MARIANO, JR.

ORDER REGARDING COUNSEL FOR ALEJANDRO B. MARIANO, JR.
At the hearing on August 10, 2015, this court expressed
concern about whether it had jurisdiction over this action.

It

appeared to this court that there was no diversity jurisdiction,
leaving the court with a question about whether Plaintiffs were
raising a federal question that would confer federal jurisdiction
on this court.

The Complaint, which is signed by Plaintiffs

Elvira Mariano and Alejandro B. Mariano, Jr., refers to
discrimination on the basis of disability, but the references are
far from clear as to what, if any, federal claim is being
brought.

This court's practice is to address jurisdictional

matters before examining whether a plaintiff has stated a claim
upon which relief may be granted.
Plaintiffs are proceeding pro se, and Plaintiff
Alejandro B. Mariano, Jr., is, according to Plaintiff Elvira
Mariano, so disabled that he cannot participate in proceedings.
Having informed Elvira Mariano that, as a nonattorney, she may
not represent Alejandro B. Mariano, Jr., the court is concerned
that any federal claim Alejandro may be attempting to state not
turn on Elvira's response to this court's jurisdictional
concerns.

For that reason, this court proposes to seek pro bono

counsel for Alejandro so that counsel can address, at the very
Pro bono counsel might

least, the jurisdictional issue.

conceivably seek leave to file an amended complaint on behalf of
Alejandro, or could even decide to represent all Plaintiffs or
seek to amend the complaint on behalf of all Plaintiffs.
This court stresses that it is not suggesting that
Plaintiffs have a viable federal claim at all.

This court has

already articulated its concern that Plaintiffs have mistakenly
sought review by this court of state court orders, instead of
using the appellate system in the state courts.

But this court

begins with the question of its own jurisdiction, and to
determine whether it has jurisdiction, it must hear from someone
other than a nonattorney with respect to Alejandro's assertions.
This court will defer its ruling on the pending dispositive

2

motions until the court has completed attempts to find pro bono
counsel.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, August 12, 2015.

/s/ Susan Oki Mollway
Susan Oki Mollway
Chief United States District Judge

Elvira R. Mariano, et al. v. Bank of Hawaii, Civil No. 15-00087
SOM-BMK; ORDER REGARDING COUNSEL FOR ALEJANDRO B. MARIANO, JR.

3