{"id":14741,"date":"2011-10-08T08:01:08","date_gmt":"2011-10-08T08:01:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/newspaper.ctsi-logistics.com\/?p=14741"},"modified":"2011-10-08T08:01:08","modified_gmt":"2011-10-08T08:01:08","slug":"bid-to-stop-enforcement-of-derivative-law-denied","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/bid-to-stop-enforcement-of-derivative-law-denied\/","title":{"rendered":"Bid to stop enforcement of derivative law denied"},"content":{"rendered":"<div>By Ferdie de la Torre<br \/>\nReporter<\/div>\n<p>Superior Court associate judge Kenneth L. Govendo denied yesterday the NMI Retirement Fund&#8217;s motion for a preliminary injunction that seeks to stop the enforcement of the controversial Derivative Beneficiaries Act.<\/p>\n<p>He said that duly enacted statutes are presumed constitutional and that Public Law 17-51 increased standing and has no direct impact on the Fund.<\/p>\n<p>The new law allows Fund beneficiaries to sue on behalf of the pension program if the Fund&#8217;s board refuses to initiate such legal action.<\/p>\n<p>Govendo said the termination of contracts by four of the Fund&#8217;s money managers is an incidental effect of Public Law 17-51.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe granting of a preliminary injunction will not cause the Fund&#8217;s agents to resume their contracts. The Fund can hire new agents, and those agents can purchase insurance to mitigate the additional risks caused by Public Law 17-51,\u201d said the judge in his 14-page ruling.<\/p>\n<p>The Fund, through counsel, Carolyn M. Kern, had questioned the constitutionality of the derivative law and argued that issuing a temporary restraining order against it will ensure that the Fund&#8217;s assets are invested to maximize the length of time that benefit payments will continue.<\/p>\n<p>The Fund had also asked the court to stop the Superior Court&#8217;s clerk of court from accepting any lawsuit filed pursuant to Public Law 17-51.<\/p>\n<p>The Office of the Attorney General, as counsel for Fitial, Inos, and the Superior Courts&#8217; clerk of court, had opposed the motion for temporary injunction.<\/p>\n<p>Assistant attorney general Michael A. Stanker argued that Public Law 17-51 does not harm the Fund but actually endows it and the beneficiaries with additional benefits.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWhile the practical effect of the law is that the Fund&#8217;s agents have quit, all the board needs to do to remedy this situation is hire new agents,\u201d Stanker pointed out.<\/p>\n<p>Three retirees-Mariano Taitano, Roman F. Tudela, and Patricia Guerrero-also opposed as intervenors to the Fund&#8217;s request for a TRO, arguing through counsel Michael Dotts that there is no justification for the court to restrain Public Law 17-51, which is a lawfully enacted law.<\/p>\n<p>Dotts said the Fund has other managers besides those who have quit.<\/p>\n<p>In the Fund&#8217;s TRO request, Kern said the Fund has already suffered irreparable harm when its investment consultant, actuary, and at least two money managers terminated or suspended their contracts with the Fund.<\/p>\n<p>In denying the injunction, Govendo said that Public Law 17-51 does not directly affect the Fund&#8217;s assets.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWithout a direct effect, the law cannot violate the Constitution. It merely has the incidental effects of chaining the contracting climate that the board must operate in,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>The judge said the temporary incidental effects of Public Law 17-51 do not constitute an impairment or a diminishment of the beneficiaries&#8217; interests.<\/p>\n<p>The Fund, Govendo said, is fully capable of suing for any conduct by its agents that violates contracts.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cPublic Law 17-51 expands the Fund&#8217;s rights as the beneficiaries can now sue on behalf of the Fund when the board refuses to act. Thus, there is no impairment,\u201d Govendo pointed out.<\/p>\n<p>Govendo held an emergency hearing on the TRO request on Sept. 19.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By Ferdie de la Torre Reporter Superior Court associate judge Kenneth L. Govendo denied yesterday&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14741","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-local-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14741","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14741"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14741\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14741"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14741"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14741"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}