Court to hear Hill's motion for Goldberg's disqualification By MAR-VIC CAGURANGAN
The Superior Court is scheduled to hear tomorrow the motion for disqualification filed by lawyer Joe Hill against Assistant Atty. General Robert Goldberg, who is defending immigration officials and employees in a civil case filed by an alien worker.
Hill said Goldberg’s representation of multiple clients who have conflicting interests threatens the judicial process.
“To represent multiple clients at all, an attorney must first form a good faith in belief that the interests of different clients are in not conflict,” Hill wrote in his motion for disqualification filed last month. “If they are, the rule is mandatory that the attorney must withdraw.”
Hill is representing He Guo Quing who sued immigration officials and employees two years ago in connection with a factory raid by government agents on a mission to arrest illegal aliens. He Guo was among the alien workers arrested and locked up following the raid.
He’s complaint alleged that supervisors of the Department of Labor and Immigration sent “line-level officers out on factory raids without adequate recognition, training or supervision concerning when exigent circumstances arise or how and when to obtain a warrant.”
Named defendants in the civil action were the CNMI government, then DOLI Secretary Thomas P Sablan, David Ayuyu, Ralph Demapan, Mark Zachares, who was legal counsel to DOLI at that time, Masaki Nakamura, John Taitano and Julie Omar. They were all sued in their individual capacities.
“The conflict and adversity among these defendants is inherent in the nature of their respective roles,” Hill said.
“The line-level officers have a distinct interest in showing that they are entitled to qualified immunity and/or that even if they are liable for violating plaintiff’s rights, they acted at all times within their respective scope of employment.”
Hill argued that if the defendants could prove individually that they acted in their official capacity, then they would be entitled to indemnification by the government for any damages awarded to He.
But Hill said Goldberg cannot adequately protect the “distinct and disparate interests” of the individual defendants. This situation threatens both the integrity of the judicial process and the defendants’ right to fair trial, Hill added.
At the same time, Hill said, his client has an obligation and the right to seek the defense counsel’s disqualification because her “interest in her judgment is prejudiced.
