Ex-mayor Manglona prevails in wrongful termination suit

The Superior Court yesterday found former Rota Mayor Benjamin T. Manglona and Department of Lands and Natural Resources Rota resident head Vicente M. Atalig not liable in a wrongful termination lawsuit filed against them by a government official.

Associate Judge Juan T. Lizama ruled that, under the existing case law, there is no basis for bringing the tort of wrongful termination against a supervisor rather than the employer.

Because Manglona and Atalig were the supervisors of Land Registration and Survey for Rota deputy director Mariano S. Sablan, they are not the proper subjects for a tort action based on wrongful termination, Lizama said.

Tort refers to a private or civil wrong or injury resulting from a breach of a legal duty.

Sablan’s complaint, the judge said, “does not contain allegations from which an inference…may be [fairly] drawn that evidence on the public policy at issue will be introduced at trial.”

“Nor does the complaint set forth a claim against the proper party—the Commonwealth,” Lizama said, adding that his ruling does not address the issue of whether the tort of wrongful termination extends to all employees in the Commonwealth.

Court records show that Sablan sued Manglona and Atalig for allegedly illegally terminating his employment in 2003. He sued the defendants in their individual capacities, although the complaint alleged that defendants were acting “under color of law” and the Attorney General has taken responsibility for their defense.

Sablan was made the deputy director of Land Registration and Survey on Rota in May 1998. His employment was then renewed annually until 2003, when it was terminated.

Sablan challenged his termination with the Civil Service Commission, arguing that he was a civil service employee.

CSC agreed and on March 3, 2004, it ordered that Sablan be reinstated and awarded back pay and benefits. He was reinstated on March 18, 2004, but did not receive his back pay and benefits until April 28, 2004.

Sablan’s original complaint alleged wrongful termination, breach of contract, and deprivation of property without due process of law.

The wrongful termination was dismissed without prejudice due to his failure to allege that any public policy violation was implicated in his termination.

The contract claim was dismissed without prejudice because Sablan did not appear to have evidence of the existence of a contract between himself and the defendants.

The claims relating to deprivation of property survived the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

Sablan submitted a first amended complaint to address some of the deficiencies of the original complaint.

Manglona and Atalig, through assistant attorney general Jeanne H. Rayphand, moved for judgment on the pleadings with respect to the wrongful termination claim.

Defendants argued that they are not the proper parties for the action, and the tort of wrongful termination against public policy does not apply to the facts at hand.

In granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment, Lizama ruled that, from the complaint alone, it does not appear that Sablan “can satisfy the elements for an action on a wrongful tort in violation of public policy.”

Although plaintiff’s briefing has identified the public policy on which his argument relies, Lizama said, Sablan “has not shown causation or an absence of justification.”

Based on these pleadings, it does not appear that plaintiff will be able to maintain the action, the judge pointed out.

Defendants asserted that since Sablan’s employer was the Commonwealth, a cause of action cannot lie against the defendants, who were his supervisors.

Sablan argued that because defendants had the power to terminate his employment (and did so), they can be held liable.

Lizama said the fact that defendants had the power to terminate plaintiff’s position is significant.

“However, defendants were not responsible for paying plaintiff’s wages. The Commonwealth was responsible. Thus, it is the Commonwealth alone who was the employer of plaintiff,” the judge said.