Lizama finds heir entitled to $3.4M Malite settlement

By
|
Posted on May 28 2006
Share

The Superior Court has recognized an estate as heir to the daughter of Angel Malite, whose estate received a $3.4 million land settlement from the defunct Marianas Public Lands Authority.

Associate Judge Juan T. Lizama ruled that the estate of Jesus Somol is entitled to inherit from Remedio’s estate (and from Angel Malite estate) as if Somol were a natural child of Remedio Malite.

Lizama, however, stated that his decision does not resolve the mechanism of inheritance from Angel Malite estate.

Lizama said the parties in the probate should come to an agreement among themselves in accordance with their custom, or submit briefs in support of a particular method or formula for resolving the inheritance issue.

Likewise, the judge noted, his decision does not resolve how Jesus Somol estate will be split among his heirs.

Lizama cautioned the parties that all of Jesus Somol’s children (or the issue of any deceased children) must be included in this distribution.

“From the testimony of Bibiana Lemao alone, the Court can find that Jesus Somol was adopted mwei mwei at a young age,” he said.

Court records show that a hearing was held on the issue whether Jesus Somol, the father of claimant Juan Somol, was the adopted child of Remedio Malite through the Carolinian custom of mwei mwei.

Remedio Malite was the daughter of Angel Malite, and ultimately, claimant Juan Somol, seeks a share in the Angel estate.

Jesus Somol’s children have already been recognized as his heirs in the probate of Jesus Somol’s estate. Juan Somol serves as the administrator of Remedio Malite estate, and has accepted the claim on behalf of Remedio Malite estate.

The objectors in the case, the clients of counsel Steve Nutting, are the same as those in the Angel Malite estate. Jesus Tudela, the administrator of Angel Malite estate officially accepted Juan Somol’s claim of heirship to Angel Malite estate after initially rejecting it.

The present probate of the Angel Malite estate has been going on for nine years. Several previous attempts to probate this estate were abandoned. Lizama only recently learned that all of Angel Malite’s children were deceased, and that none of the estates had been probated.

Following the May 3, 2006 hearing in the Angel Malite estate, counsel opened probate in the estate of each of Angel Malite’s deceased children and grandchildren.

In granting the claim of the estate of Jesus Somol as an heir to the Remedio Malite estate, Lizama said there is little evidence regarding the circumstances of Remedio Malite’s care for Jesus Somol.

“Almost all of the witnesses who testified did not know Jesus Somol when he was a child, and therefore cannot shed light on the circumstances surrounding his childhood relationship with Remedio Malite,” Lizama said.

The judge explained that the essence of mwei mwei is an oral agreement, without the written formalities familiar to statutory adoptions.

Lizama established that Jesus Somol was born to Carmen Olopai and Juan Somol on Dec. 17, 1926. Carmen Olopai had already lost three children before having Jesus Somol.

While Jesus Somol was still young, Carmen Olopai gave him to Remedio Malite. Remedio Malite was a distant cousin of Carmen Olopai.

Remedio Malite, her husband Lamalour (a native of Satawaal), and Jesus Somol went to Satawaal, Yap, while Jesus Somol was still young. There they met Bibiana Lemao.

According to Lemao, Remedio Malite cared for Jesus Somol as if he were her child.

Remedio Malite and Jesus Somol went to Pulusuk, Chuuk, and then back to Saipan in 1953. Jesus Somol and Gregoria Litulumar had three children, Juan Somol, Leonisa Somol, and Aurora L. Manglona.

Remedio Somol moved from household to household until she died in 1973.

In the late 1970s, surveying commenced on Lot 388 near Jesus Somol’s and Juan Somol’s house. David H. Marciano had requested the surveying of this property pursuant to court order in 1976.

Jesus and Juan Somol attempted to attack the surveyors with a machete.

The court rule against the objectors to the surveying, and ordered to allow the surveying.

In 1976, the court noted an objection to distribution filed in the same matter by “Joaquina Malite and Acoba Malite on behalf of themselves, Remedio Malite, and the heirs of Elias Malite claiming they are the only lineal descendants of Angel Malite and therefore the only persons who have an interest in Lot 388.

Jesus Somol died in April 1989. Jesus’s death certificate says that he is the child of Carmen and Juan Olopai.

In March 2006, following the publication of the $3.4 million settlement, Juan Somol filed his claim.

In April 2006, the administrator of the Angel Malite, through counsel, filed a rejection of the claim. Then on May 3, 2006, the administrator, through counsel, filed a statement indicating that he accepted the claim.

At the hearings, the administrator suggested that he was initially under pressure by other family members to deny the claim. He changed his mind after Juan Somol visited him and asked for help in getting a share in the family land.

Lizama said mwei mwei, the most honorable form of adoption, usually occurs while a child is still breast feeding.

Lizama said the objective of the hearing was not to establish the dates of events that took place more than 30 years ago.

“As the present case indicates, it is a disservice to the estate to leave out potential heirs and risk future litigation,” Lizama said.

The judge said the fact that objectors did not see Jesus Somol and Remedio Malite in her later years may be because the Malites did not see much of either Remedio or Jesus.

“There is a preponderance of evidence suggesting that Jesus Somol was adopted pursuant to mwei mwei,” he said.

Although all of the evidence is circumstantial, the judge pointed out, there is enough evidence for the court to find that Jesus Somol was adopted pursuant to Carolinian custom.

Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.