Poker owner wants Govendo disqualified from divorce suit

Attorney Timothy H. Bellas disclosed that Superior Court associate judge Kenneth L. Govendo insists on handling his client’s domestic court matters despite a CNMI Supreme Court restriction that bars him from doing so.

Bellas’ client, Byoong Seob Choi, wants Govendo disqualified from handling the case on the basis of personal bias and appearance of partiality.

In his declaration, Choi states that he had learned that his former wife, Jung Ja Kim, had told community members that he would lose this case because Govendo does not like poker machines and their owners. Choi owns several poker establishments, laundry shops, and commercial apartments.

In his declaration in support of the motion for disqualification, Bellas said that Govendo had summoned him to his chambers on June 6, 2011, to discuss the case.

“When I went to the judge’s chambers, the judge disclosed to me that in spite of the restriction imposed on him by the CNMI Supreme Court he intended to continue as the judge in this matter,” the lawyer said.

Bellas was referring to a Supreme Court determination last year that had found Govendo in violation of the provisions of the Commonwealth Code of Judicial Conduct, as well as some of the Commonwealth Rules of Judicial Disciplinary Procedure. The High Court ordered, among other things, that Govendo be reassigned from the Family Court Division for a period of one year.

Bellas said that Govendo further informed him that he had already initiated contact with both judge Perry Inos and presiding judge Robert Naraja about keeping this case and that they were okay with him doing so.

In his declaration, Choi said that he and Kim were divorced in mid-2005, but while the divorce proceedings were pending, Govendo awarded Kim interim support of $15,000 per month. Choi said that Govendo also required him to give her full access to all businesses and their associated records.

Shortly after the divorce was granted, Choi said that he and Kim reconciled and began cohabiting again so both of them instructed their attorneys to cancel their divorce. Govendo signed an order on Dec. 15, 2005, that vacated the divorce decree.

In August 2007, Choi said, he went on a business trip to South Korea and returned in April 2008 to find out that his wife had an affair with his then attorney (not Bellas).

Believing that he was still married to Kim, Choi said he instructed a new attorney to file for divorce.

Choi said that part of a temporary restraining order Govendo issued in June 2008 denied him all access to their businesses and all marital income.

“As a result, Ms. Kim has had sole custody of the marital property and income since June of 2008, which, at a minimum, currently adds up to roughly $1.8 million,” he said.

Based on Govendo’s rulings, Choi said, he was forced to agree to $3,000 a month payment from the marital income as temporary support while Kim continued to have sole possession of the marital businesses and income.

Choi said that despite the enormous income that Kim has at her disposal Govendo recently ruled that even the $3,000 per month that he was receiving since June 2008, should be stopped.

Since then, Choi said he has been unable to meet his financial obligations, much less live the lifestyle he had prior to the judge’s order.

“When I learned that Judge Govendo was ordered by the Supreme Court not to have anything to do with divorce matters, I was happy because I felt that his past decisions unfairly favored Ms. Kim,” Choi said.