MPLA’s appeal in land compensation case dismissed

The CNMI Supreme Court has dismissed the appeal of the Marianas Public Lands Authority from the trial court’s decision that favored a landowner in his land compensation lawsuit against MPLA.

Associate Justice Alexandro C. Castro ruled that the high court lacks jurisdiction to hear Jose CH. Camacho’s lawsuit.

Castro said despite MPLA’s assertions of harm, it has failed to demonstrate it is entitled to immunity or that the adverse ruling could not be corrected on appeal as a final order.

“Indeed, MPLA’s insistence that Camacho’s claims need to be brought to an administrative board before any trial court can easily be remedied, if need be, after a trial on the merits,” he pointed out.

Castro said he is aware of MPLA’s newest appeal and is concerned about the continued delay in the case.

“All litigants are now warned that negligent, frivolous or bad faith filings will be met with sanctions,” said the associate justice, citing that in this case MPLA either ignored or didn’t find case law that was directly on point.

Castro stressed that litigants have a duty to make sure their pleadings or motions are “well grounded in fact or law.”

“MPLA’s request to dismiss the instant appeal in favor of its newest one gives lie to the legal arguments used. This will no longer be tolerated,” he said.

Camacho filed the lawsuit in 2004 against MPLA and the Department of Public Works for taking of private property for a public purpose without just compensation.

The plaintiff, through counsel Robert T. Torres, claimed he is the legal owner of three parcels of land in As Lito measuring a total of 737 square meters.

In December 1990 DPW executed a memorandum of understanding for right-of-way acquisition with Camacho and his siblings to acquire the property for a utility easement and public right-of-way for a paved road.

Torres said DPW resurfaced and paved the road, and other public agencies have placed utility lines and other infrastructure upon or below the property.

On Aug. 5, 2005, Superior Court Associate Judge David A. Wiseman ruled that Camacho is entitled to just compensation in the amount offered by the government in 1991 and 1992 for the taking of his land in As Lito for a public use.

“As such, the Court determines that the $90 per square meter for a fee simple interest and an additional $299,000 severance damage amount offered to and accepted by plaintiff (Camacho) is the proper measure of the value of the three lots comprising the 737 square meters of plaintiff’s land taken for public use,” said Wiseman in his order granting Camacho’s motion for summary judgment.

MPLA, through counsel Ramon Quichocho, moved the court to reconsider its decision. Quichocho said Wiseman’s ruling is “clearly erroneous and is manifestly unjust as to MPLA.”

Wiseman denied MPLA’s motion.

MPLA filed the appeal from a denial of its motion to dismiss a suit for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Originally, Camacho requested the high court to dismiss the appeal. MPLA agreed.

But Castro in his order issued on Tuesday explained that because of the contentious nature of this litigation, and his concern over the improper use of the appellate process, he has decided to provide an explanation as to why this appeal should be dismissed.

Castro said he expects that the parties in the case will take notice and refrain from misusing the court system.

The associate justice said in its rush to the high tribunal, MPLA either negligently overlooked or ignored precedent concerning the collateral-order doctrine.

Collateral-order doctrine refers to a small class of decisions which determine claims of right separable from, and collateral to, rights asserted in the main action.

Castro said while it is theoretically possible MPLA is correct, denials of a motion to dismiss based on forum selection are not immediately reviewable.