Judge says libel cannot arise out of court filings

Superior Court Associate Judge Joseph N. Camacho has dismissed a libel counterclaim, which was filed by a man who was declared by the federal court as a vexatious litigant, against a widow and her daughter.

Camacho ruled on Thursday that statements made by an attorney during the course of a case, including “all pleadings and affidavits necessary to set the judicial machinery in motion,” are absolutely privileged.

Camacho said since the counterclaim clearly establishes the absolute defense against it, that the contents of a complaint cannot be libelous, John Sablan Pangelinan’s counterclaim for libel against Secundina Untalan Pangelinan and her daughter, Selina Marie Pangelinan, must be dismissed.

In the same order, Camacho dismissed John Pangelinan’s counterclaims for quiet title and abuse of process.

Secundina and Selina Pangelinan, through counsel Janet H. King, are suing John Pangelinan for allegedly abusing the legal system to extort money from them by interfering with a probate matter although he is not a creditor.

Camacho ruled in July 2017 that plaintiffs Secundina and Selina Pangelinan have standing to file the lawsuit and have also alleged facts sufficient to establish the elements of the causes of action of abuse of process and interference with contract.

Camacho cited that John Pangelinan filed several motions in this case.

The judge noted that defendant’s repeated filing of motions with little substance with accompanying voluminous attachments is the same filing pattern that he used in a separate lawsuit.

In Secundina and Selina Pangelinan’s motion to dismiss the counterclaims, King argued that the libel counterclaim is barred and must be dismissed since defamation actions cannot arise out of judicial proceedings.

John Pangelinan’s libel counterclaim alleges that the Secundina and Selina Pangelinan’s lawsuit in the present case accused him of abuse of process.

John Pangelinan further alleged that the plaintiffs “repeatedly and maliciously badmouthed” him as a vexatious litigant in their complaint.

He alleged that plaintiffs caused Marianas Variety News and Views to publish falsehoods about himself on May 8 and July 21, 2017, where King was quoted in the articles.

He argued that the negative press caused him to lose purchase offers for his land and caused him emotional distress.

In his order last Thursday dismissing John Pangelinan’s counterclaim for libel, Camacho said the May 8, 2017 publication, attached to the amended answer and counterclaim as exhibit A, is clearly drawing from Secundina and Selina’s complaint throughout the article.

On John Pangelinan’s counterclaim for quiet title, Camacho said the claim is dismissed as barred by res judicator.

Under res judicata, “a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from re-litigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.”

On John Pangelinan’s counterclaim for abuse of power, Camacho said such counterclaim is not yet ripe, as the court cannot yet determine whether the present case, was instituted “primarily to accomplish a purpose for which [legal process] is not designed.”

Camacho dismissed the abuse of process claim without prejudice.

Dismiss without prejudice means John Pangelinan may re-file such claim in the future.

In June 2008, U.S. District Court for the NMI designated judge Frances M. Tydingco-Gatewood declared John Pangelinan a vexatious litigant and prohibited him from filing any lawsuit or documents in federal court that is related to a 1997 civil lawsuit filed against him.