Fund asks court to suspend PSS’, Dr. Ada’s suit for 3 mos.

The NMI Settlement Fund has asked the Superior Court to suspend for three months the proceedings in the lawsuit filed by the Public School System and Education Commissioner Dr. Alfred Ada against Gov. Ralph DLG Torres and Finance Secretary David Atalig.

In an emergency motion filed Tuesday, Settlement Fund counsel Nicole M. Torres-Ripple said a stay is necessary to give the Settlement Fund enough time to request the determination of the federal court on issues raised by PSS and Ada relating to the interpretation and enforcement of the settlement agreement entered in Betty Johnson’s class action in 2013, where the CNMI government will make annual payments to the settlement to fund at least 75% of pension benefits. All Retirement Fund assets were then transferred to the Settlement Fund, with Joyce Tang as the court-appointed trustee.

Torres-Ripple said the questions raised in PSS and Ada’s complaint require interpretation of the settlement agreement in Johnson’s class action, over which the District Court has exclusive jurisdiction.

On Tuesday, the Settlement Fund also filed a motion before the District Court, requesting that the court resolve PSS’ challenges to the constitutionally-mandated payment obligations owed the Settlement Fund under the settlement agreement entered in the Johnson class action.

Torres-Ripple said in the case filed by PSS and Ada, they allege violations of the CNMI Constitution based on eight statutory appropriations identified as expenditures in the Fiscal Year 2020 budget set forth in Public Law 21-8, including some appropriations for payments under the settlement agreement

Torres-Ripple said the Settlement Fund has sought the District Court’s interpretation and enforcement of the settlement agreement and judgment, which necessarily includes PSS’ challenges to the funding source for payment obligations under the settlement agreement raised in PSS’s complaint and motion for summary judgment.

The lawyer said the District Court has continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the interpretation and enforcement of the settlement agreement pursuant to a section of the settlement agreement.

She pointed out that the issues raised by PSS and Ada involve the invalidation of appropriation and budget laws for payment obligations under the settlement agreement, which, in turn, would affect the government’s ability to satisfy obligations and risk default under the terms of the settlement agreement.

“Because the issues require interpretation and application of the settlement agreement, this case should be stayed so that the District Court can address the issues,” Torres-Ripple said.