Banks seek dismissal of Flores’ lawsuit

First Hawaiian Bank sought the dismissal yesterday of the lawsuit filed by Saipan Mayor Donald G. Flores, who is seeking the return of his time certificate deposit in the amount of $200,000 that he allegedly purchased in 1993.

After hearing the parties’ argument, U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona placed the motion under advisement. She also ruled that the court has jurisdiction over the case.

Flores appeared with counsel, Juan T. Lizama. Attorney Richard Johnson appeared on behalf of First Hawaiian Bank. Attorneys Elyze McDonald Iriarte served as counsels for Union Bank of California.

Iriarte argued for First Hawaiian Bank’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Johnson argued Union Bank of California’s support to the motion to dismiss. Lizama opposed the motion.

Flores is suing First Hawaiian Bank and Union Bank of California for allegedly refusing to return the principal and interest earned on a time certificate of deposit that he purchased from the then Union Bank Saipan branch in 1993.

Flores is suing the banks for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, negligence or gross negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud.

On Nov. 15, 2001, Union Bank reportedly sold all assets and liabilities of its Saipan branch office to First Hawaiian Bank.

In its motion to dismiss, Johnson denied that First Hawaiian Bank received Flores’ $200,000. Johnson pointed out that FHB twice wrote to counsel for Flores denying that it ever received his $200,000.

Union Bank of California joined FHB’s motion to dismiss. Iriarte said that Flores’ claim that he purchased a certificate of deposit in the amount of $200,000 in 1993 from the now defunct Union Bank as a long-term investment defies common sense.

Iriarte said for that long-term investment, Flores purchased a certificate of deposit that matured in a very short 32 days, with interest “payable at maturity” and made no demand for 15 years.

“If [Flores] intended a long-term investment, making a demand on a one-month CD 15 years after it matured lacks common sense,” the lawyer said.

In opposing the motion to dismiss, Flores, through Lizama, asserted that the record of his time certificate of deposit could not have disappeared without any negligence or its intentional destruction.

Lizama asserted, among other things, that the shredding of documents is extremely suspect.