Gov't of Guam v. Gutierrez, (2015)

2015 Guam 8

GOVERNMENT OF GUAM, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. GERALDINE T. GUTIERREZ,in her capacity as Administratrix of the ESTATE OF JOSE MARTINEZ TORRESand the ESTATE OF JOSE MARTINEZ TORRES,Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

Supreme Court Case No.: CVA14-007 Superior Court Case No.: CV1124-09

SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

Argued and submitted: September 29, 2014

March 27, 2015

OPINION

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam

Argued and submitted on September 29,2014

Hagåtña, Guam

For Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees:

F. Randall Cunliffe, Esq.

Cunliffe & Cook, P.C.

210 Archbishop Flores St., Ste. 200

Hagåtña, GU 96910

Joseph C. Razzano, Esq.

Joshua D. Walsh, Esq.

Civille & Tang, PLLC

330 Hernan Cortez Ave., Ste. 200

Hagåtña, GU 96910

For Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant:

David J. Highsmith, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General

Office of the Attorney General

Civil Division

590 S. Marine Corps Dr., Ste. 706

Tamuning, GU 96913BEFORE: KATHERINE A. MARAMAN, Presiding Justice;¹ DAVID A. WISEMAN, Justice Pro Tempore; J. BRADLEY KLEMM, Justice Pro Tempore.

MARAMAN, J.:

[1] This appeal concerns the ownership of certain real property seized by the United States Government following the Japanese occupation of the island during the Second World War and thereafter returned to the Government of Guam for transfer to its original owners. The present dispute centers on a deed for one such property granted by the Guam Ancestral Lands Commission ("GALC") to the Estate of Jose Martinez Torres. Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees Geraldine T. Gutierrez, Administratrix of the Estate of Jose Martinez Torres, and the Estate of Jose Martinez Torres (collectively, "the Estate") appeal a decision and order from the trial court granting reformation of the Estate's deed and remanding determination of the Estate's land claims back to the GALC. The Estate alleges that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to reform the deed and erred in granting summary judgment based solely on evaluation of a transcript from the 2006 GALC hearing. The Estate further opposes the continued injunction levied against it and contends that the trial court erred in failing to address its motion for sanctions against Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant Government of Guam ("the Government"). The Government cross-appeals, alleging that the GALC lacked authority to transfer the property to the Estate in the first instance and claiming that the trial court possessed jurisdiction to address its remaining claims of quiet title, declaratory judgment, and constructive trust. For the reasons set forth below, both the appeal and cross-appeal are affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded for further proceedings in the Superior Court.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

[2] This case arises from a dispute regarding a quitclaim deed to certain property in Dededo marked as lots AL002, AL002-1, and AL002-2 (the "Property"). According to the Estate, Mariquita Souder, an heir of the purported landowner Jose Martinez Torres, began filing applications with the GALC for the return of ancestral land in 2003. Although most of her applications were granted, the application as to the Property was denied because the GALC deemed the land to be former Spanish Crown Land. After Ms. Souder died, Evelyn O'Keefe assumed her role. O'Keefe hired experts to demonstrate that the land was not Spanish Crown Land, filed a Motion for Reconsideration, and presented the expert testimony at a hearing before the GALC in August 2006.

[3] In September 2006, the GALC held a hearing with five commissioners present, as well as Attorneys Rawlen Mantanona, Joseph Razzano, and Louis Yanza, who represented O'Keefe. After discussing the location of the lands at issue, the commission clarified the Estate's claim. According to a transcript provided by the Estate, the following conversation took place:

MR. CHARFAUROS: I'd like to make a motion and my motion would be basically to be in line with the request of the family to recognize the claim to the estate of the lots mentioned herein on the record, which would also extinguish all claims to the Duarte Estate. And also that this be a conditional deed that you still have to go to the courts and go through the regular court proceedings to - and correct me if I'm wrong, is that going to the court proceedings to review this claim and the court will make the final judgment on the claim.

MR. YANZA: That is correct Mr. Chairman. On behalf of the estate, neither I myself, Mr. Mantanona and Mr. Razzano or Mrs. O'Keefe can declare that we hereby terminate all future claims to ancestral lands. But, as we saw fit best [sic] for the estate, we are willing to go before the probate court and the probate estate of Mr. Torres and

request the court that they, the Court, approves the receipt of these ancestral lands and approve the final termination of future claims within the inventory of the commission.

MR. CHARFAUROS: And understand this, this is a conditional deed and if the Court comes back that says, that you will have absolutely no claim to this property, this property comes right back into the inventory of the Ancestral Lands Commission and that we are not going to rehear this case again. Unless you guys have convincing evidence that has not been reviewed by the Court to rehear the case. Do you understand exactly what this motion is?

MR. YANZA: Yes.

MR. MANTANONA: Yes, we do.

. . . .

MR. CHARFAUROS: Yeah. And understand, I'm not asking the family for permission for this extinguishment. My motion is not asking for permission, I'm making this motion. And this motion is to extinguish this claim and basically, it's up to the Courts and if the Court see fit that this motion is inappropriate then the Courts can rule against that and if the Court sees fit that this claim is invalid, this property would come back to the inventory of the Ancestral Lands Commission. But basically the Court is going to be the final say so. Do you understand that motion?

MR. MANTANONA: Yes.

MR. YANZA: Mr. Commissioner? Just to clarify.

MR. CHARFAUROS: Yeah.

MR YANZA: This present motion on the floor, this would be a conditional transfer of the properties so long as the court approves it and once the court approves it -

MR. CHARFAUROS: Yes. In other words, where it's a conditional deed that we're giving you. You still have to go to the courts and - if the Courts comes back and say yes -

MR. YANZA: Okay. We understand that. We accept that.

MS. ORLINO: And then it's going to not come before this commission again?

MR. MANTANONA: Right, yeah.

MR. YANZA: No, no. If the court approves of the transfer -

MS. ORLINO: Then it's a done deal.

. . . .

MR: YANZA: And then the condition would be satisfied?

MR. MANTANANE: Yeah, right.

MR. CHARFAUROS: If the court rules against it, then it comes - that property comes back into -

MR. ECLAVEA: Into our inventory.

RA, tab 128, Ex. 1 at 26-30 (Guam Ancestral Lands Comm'n Hr'g, Sept. 26, 2006) ("GALC Hr'g"). The attorneys agreed to draft the deed for the GALC's review.

[4] On September 25, 2006, the Estate's attorneys sent a letter to the GALC and its commissioners. The letter stated:

As per the GALC September 20, 2006 hearing, I enclose for your easy reference, a copy of our proposed Quitclaim Deed deeding from the GALC to the Estate. As you will note, I have essentially copied the same language in the GALC's Quitclaim Deed template. There are, however, a few changes. The changes are:

1. Decision: The decision by the Commission acknowledging the Estate's property (pp. 3-4).

2. Lot Descriptions (pp. 3-4 and 6-7).

3. Condition: Pursuant to the motion approved by the Commission, I direct your attention to pages 11-12 in which the conditions of the Quitclaim Deed are set forth therein. As was decided, the transfer of the properties to the Estate is conditioned upon the Estate going before the probate court to approve the acceptance of the properties in exchange for the Estate to forego all other claims against the Commission for other properties held by the Commission.

RA tab 134, Ex. G at 1-2 (Letter from Louie J. Yanza to GALC, Sept 25, 2006) (emphasis added).

[5] The Final Written Decision and Order, issued by the GALC and signed by GALC Commissioners Orlino and Cruz, expressly stated that:

The Commission ... directs the Chairperson and Secretary of the Commission to condition the return of the properties to the Estate that the Estate shall request the probate court of the Jose M. Torres Estate to accept the return of the properties in exchange for the Estate terminating all future claims . . . .

RA tab 134, Ex. I at 4 (Final Written Dec. & Order, Dec. 26,2006).

[6] On June 7, 2007, the Estate petitioned the Probate Court "to Compromise and to Confirm Quitclaim Deed and Real Property Received by the Estate [t]hrough the Ancestral Lands Commission." RA, tab 89, Ex. 2 at 1 (Pet. Compromise, June 12, 2007). The petition was approved by the probate court on August 31, 2007. The GALC thereafter filed a "Satisfaction and Release of Condition Placed on Deed" on September 26, 2007. RA, tab 66, Ex. A at 1 (Satisfaction & Release, Sept. 26, 2007). This release quotes the condition in the quitclaim deed, and declares it to be satisfied. The deed was signed on October 17, 2006.

[7] The Government, acting on behalf of the GALC,² filed a "Complaint for Reformation of Deed, for Declaratory Judgment, to Quiet Title, and for Imposition of a Constructive Trust" on July 24, 2009. RA, tab 2, at 1 (Compl. Reformation of Deed, July 24, 2009).³

[8] The court issued a preliminary injunction on February 10, 2009, "to enjoin [the Estate] from distributing the assets contained within the Estate . . . ." RA, tab 45 at 1 (Order, Feb. 10, 2010). The court stated that the injunction would be in effect "for ten (10) days from the date of this order." Id. at 3. The court held a hearing for a motion for a permanent injunction on February 22, 2010. It continued the injunction until a hearing on March 31, 2010. The Estate filed for...