Court denies MPLA motion in land compensation case

The Superior Court has declined to reconsider a ruling that had denied the Marianas Public Lands Authority’s request for the dismissal of a landowner’s claim.

Associate Judge David Wiseman said MPLA failed to provide a new argument to prompt the court to overturn its earlier ruling on the agency’s motion to dismiss Antonio Ch. Camacho’s case.

On Aug. 23, 2005, Wiseman issued the order denying MPLA’s motion to dismiss the case.

In its motion to reconsider, MPLA argued that Camacho was barred from relief because of the statute of limitations.

MPLA also maintained that it was not the proper party to the action and that the court had no jurisdiction because of Camacho’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Wiseman dismissed MPLA’s argument concerning the statute of limitations based on a technicality.

“A motion for ‘reconsideration’ is limited to a reconsideration or reexamination of the facts and evidence before the court at the time it issued its ruling. A statute of limitations is to be asserted as an affirmative defense at the appropriate time of the pleadings. It was not raised until MPLA filed its motion for reconsideration,” the judge said.

Meanwhile, Wiseman said there was nothing new in MPLA’s argument regarding the agency being an improper party and the court’s lack of jurisdiction.

“This argument is the same argument raised and disposed of by the court in its original ruling. The argument provides nothing new in terms of facts, evidence, or even presentation. As such, the court does not find that MPLA meets the difficult burden of showing a ‘manifest error’ as required in a motion for reconsideration, but is merely expressing its displeasure with the court’s Aug. 5, 2005 order,” Wiseman said.

He was referring to the court’s order on a similar land compensation case filed by Camacho’s brother, Jose Ch. Camacho.

On Aug. 5, 2005, the Superior Court ordered MPLA to pay Jose Ch. Camacho at least $365,330 for the government’s land taking of his property over 10 years ago.

Wiseman also ruled that Jose Ch. Camacho is entitled to interest payments for the delay in obtaining compensation for the land taking. The amount of interest, though, would have to be determined at trial, the judge added.

Camacho was claiming compensation for three parcels of land with an aggregate area of 737 sq. meters that the government expropriated for public purpose. (Agnes E. Donato)