Shoda’s lawsuit vs Fund in court for 9 yrs now

Former Commonwealth Ports Authority executive director Carlos A. Shoda’s lawsuit against the NMI Retirement Fund has been pending in the Superior Court for almost nine years now.

Shoda’s case is still very much alive and associate judge David A. Wiseman, who is now handling the case, wants an immediate resolution.

Wiseman on Thursday denied the NMI Fund board of trustees’ motion to dismiss Shoda’s third amended complaint/petition for judicial review.

The judge said that, as clearly stated in the Superior Court’s order on Jan. 18, 2008, Shoda has a valid claim that he was denied due process in the unilateral reduction of his retirement fund benefits as well as a failure to test the sufficiency of the evidence included in the Office of the Public Auditor’s audit report.

Wiseman said he will file a procedural timeline in the case.

“As the parties are aware, this matter has been pending for approximately nine years,” he said. “It is the expectation of this court that this matter move promptly forward toward resolution.”

Shoda was the CPA executive director at various times between 1976 to 1989 and from 1994 to 1997.

At the time Shoda retired, he was approved for retirement benefits by the Fund based on a calculation of total credited service of 33 years, nine months, and 21 days, which would entitle him to a monthly pension of $5,761.64, paid semi-monthly.

At the time he retired, CPA allowed Shoda accrual of overtime and compensatory time to be calculated into the determination of his retirement benefits. His retirement benefits were paid at this higher rate until 1998.

In 1998, the Fund received a notice from an independent investigation that CPA had improperly calculated retirement benefits for former employees such as including overtime and compensatory time for employees who were employed via excepted service contracts.

The Fund informed Shoda that they would be reducing his retirement benefits in April 2000 by deducting the allegedly improperly granted compensatory time and overtime.

According to their calculations, Shoda had been overpaid in excess of $20,000. The Fund subsequently reduced his payments.

Shoda appealed, then filed a lawsuit.

On Jan. 16, 2008, then associate judge Juan T. Lizama granted the Fund’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, saying the Fund could only be sued through its trustees.

Lizama allowed Shoda to amend his complaint to name the correct defendant in the case.

Last August, Shoda amended the complaint to substitute the proper defendant as Lizama dictated.

The board opposed the motion. Wiseman heard the case on Wednesday.