Previous Story
‘Questions of disclosure are of public importance’
|
Posted on Jul 29 2019
U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona has ruled that issuing an injunction in connection with Imperial Pacific International (CNMI) LLC’s lawsuit against the Commonwealth Casino Commission is in the public interest because questions of CNMI government’s disclosure of confidential information are of public importance.
IPI has raised serious questions that go to the merits of their complaint, said Manglona in a written order Thursday, extending the temporary restraining order that the Superior Court earlier granted in IPI’s lawsuit.
The TRO will now expire this Friday, Aug. 2.
IPI sued CCC last month to prevent it from publicly disclosing IPI’s audited financial information following Rep. Edwin Propst’s (Ind-Saipan) Open Government Act request. Associate Judge Kenneth L. Govendo granted IPI’s TRO request.
Last week, CCC, through the Office of the Attorney General, moved to transfer IPI’s complaint to the federal court.
Last Thursday, Manglona heard IPI’s motion to extend the TRO, CCC’s opposition, and IPI’s subsidiaries Grand Marianas (CNMI) LLC and Imperial Pacific Properties LLC’s motion to join in IPI’s motion to extend.
Govendo’s TRO directed CCC to refrain from releasing information requested pursuant to Open Government Act request it received.
In finding cause to extend the TRO, Manglona said that, without an extension, the closeness in the removal of the case to the district court and the expiration of the TRO would prevent IPI from obtaining a decision on the merits of its case.
Without the preliminary relief, Manglona said, irreparable harm to IPI is likely because the disclosure of confidential information cannot be undone.
Manglona said the balance of equities tips sharply in IPI’s favor because denial of the TRO would effectively moot IPI’s case, whereas it only causes a delay to CCC.
The judge said because there is no realistic likelihood of significant harm to CCC from having to refrain from disclosing the information at question, the court declined to require IPI to post security.
The court will hear IPI’s motion for a preliminary injunction for tomorrow, Tuesday, at 10:30am.
