Robert K. Richardson v. James E.T. Koshiba, Joan S. Brown, Herbert C. Cornuelle, William L. Fleming, Henry T. Miyamoto, Lawrence S. Okinaga

Robert K. Richardson, a former Hawaii state district court judge, appeals an adverse judgment in his suit against the members of Hawaii’s Judicial Selection Commission (Commission). 1 Richardson challenges their denial of his petition for reappointment, alleging that the Commission’s treatment of his petition violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to procedural due process. He seeks monetary and equitable relief under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 , 1988. 2 He also alleges violations of Hawaii’s constitution and laws.

Because the need to decide the federal due process issues could be obviated by resolution of the state law issues presented in this case, and because we think it more appropriate to have Hawaii’s courts decide these sensitive questions of state law controlling judicial appointments, we abstain.

Facts

Richardson was appointed to a six-year term as state district court judge in 1974. During his term, the people of Hawaii altered their method of judicial selection by amending their constitution to establish a Judicial Selection Commission. Haw. Const, art. VI, § 4 (1978).

The amended constitution authorizes the Commission to nominate individuals to fill judicial vacancies and…

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion which holds that abstention is appropriate in this case. The result of that holding is not only to delay resolution of this dispute, but to prolong potentially disruptive uncertainty in the operation of Hawaii’s judicial selection system.

This result would be less disturbing if the defendants, who are the individuals to whom the state has delegated responsibility for judicial selection and retention, had asked the district court to stay its hand. They have not done so. Instead it was the plaintiff who filed a duplicate action in state court on the day before the district court was scheduled to rule in this suit, and who then sought federal abstention over defendants’ objection. In my opinion the district court’s refusal was entirely proper. Unlike the principal cases on which the majority relies,^the governmental defendants here have not expressed concern about intrusion into sensitive areas of state policy; thus this case does not present the, “exigent demands of federalism” which have influenced courts to incur the high cost of delay which abstention entails. See C. Wright, Law of Federal Courts § 52…

693 F.2d 911 Robert K. RICHARDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James E.T. KOSHIBA, Joan S. Brown, Herbert C. Cornuelle, William L. Fleming, Henry T. Miyamoto, Lawrence S. Okinaga, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 81-4041. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted April 21, 1982. Decided Dec. 1, 1982. Walter R. Schoettle, Honolulu, Hawaii, for plaintiff-appellant. Paul Alston, Paul, Johnson & Alston, Honolulu, Hawaii, for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii. Before SCHROEDER, NELSON, and BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judges. BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judge: 1 Robert K. Richardson, a former Hawaii state district court judge, appeals an adverse judgment in his suit against the members of Hawaii's Judicial Selection Commission (Commission). 1 Richardson challenges their denial of his petition for reappointment, alleging that the Commission's treatment of his petition violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to procedural due process. He seeks monetary and equitable relief under 42 U.S.C. Secs. 1983 , 1988. 2 He also alleges violations of Hawaii's constitution and laws. 2 Because the need to decide the federal due…