FSMC, TITLE 6.  JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
 
 
Chapter 14:  Enforcement of Judgments

1401.     Money judgments.
1402.     Judgments affecting land.
1403.     Other judgments - Enforcement by contempt proceedings.
1404.     Other methods of enforcement.
1405.     Writs of attachment.
1406.     Release and modification.
1407.     Writs of execution.
1408.     Levying execution.
1409.     Orders in aid of judgment - Application.
1410.     Orders in aid of judgment - Hearings.
1411.     Orders in aid of judgment - Modification of orders.
1412.     Orders in aid of judgment - Punishment of violations.
1413.     Orders in aid of judgment - Stay of execution.
1414.     Orders in aid of judgment - Application to community or District court.
1415.     Exemptions.

      1401.  Money judgments.
     Every judgment for the payment of money shall bear interest at the rate of nine percent a year from the date it is entered.  The process to enforce a judgment for the payment of money may be a writ of execution or an order in aid of judgment, as provided in sections 1405 through 1415 of this chapter.

Source:  TT Code 1966 282; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 1; COM PL 6_97 5; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 1.

Case annotations:  An intervenor must make a three part showing to qualify for intervention as a matter of right:  an interest, impairment of that interest, and inadequacy of representation by existing parties.  A tax lien holder and a judgment creditor with an unsatisfied writ of execution may intervene as a matter of right where an assignee is compromising a debtor's accounts receivable.  California Pac. Assocs. v. Alexander, 7 FSM Intrm. 198, 200 (Pon. 1995).

Comity is a recognition which one nation extends within its own territory to the legislative, executive, or judicial acts of another.  It is not a rule of law, but one of practice, convenience, and expediency.  Under principles of comity, courts will enforce foreign judgments, but not when the foreign court lacked jurisdiction, or where enforcement of the foreign judgment would violate a public policy, or where granting comity would result in prejudice to the forum's citizens.  J.C. Tenorio Enterprises, Inc. v. Sado, 6 FSM Intrm. 430, 431-32 (Pon. 1994).

An FSM court may reduce the amount of attorney's fees provided for under a foreign judgment, where that judgment is unenforceable as against public policy to the extent that the attorney fees in excess of 15% of debt are repugnant to fundamental notions of what is decent and just in the FSM.  J.C. Tenorio Enterprises, Inc. v. Sado, 6 FSM Intrm. 430, 432 (Pon. 1994).

      1402.  Judgments affecting land.
     A judgment adjudicating an interest in land shall, after the time for appeal therefrom has expired without notice of appeal being filed or after any appeal duly taken has been finally determined or after an order has been entered that an appeal shall not stay the judgment, operate the release, or transfer any interest in land in accordance with the terms of the judgment, when a copy thereof, certified by the Clerk of Courts, or any Judge of the Court, is recorded in the Office of the Clerk of Courts, in the case of unregistered land, or in the District registrar's office, in the case of registered land, for the District in which the land lies.

Source: TT Code 1966 283; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 2; COM PL 4C_34 1; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 2.

      1403.  Other judgments - Enforcement by contempt proceedings.

     (1)     Judgment for any form of relief other than the payment of money or the adjudication of an interest in land, after the time for appeal therefrom has expired without notice of appeal being filed or after any appeal duly taken has been finally determined or after an order has been entered that an appeal shall not stay the judgment, may be enforced by contempt proceedings; provided, that enforcement at such time is required to prevent irreparable injury or multiple damage to the interests of the winning party and is otherwise in the interests of justice.

     (2)     Upon a finding of contempt, the person against whom the judgment has been rendered may be fined or imprisoned at the discretion of the Court until he or she complies with the judgment or is released by the Court or has been imprisoned for six months, whichever happens first.

Source:  TT Code 1966 284; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 3; COM PL 4C_34 1;  TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 3.

      1404.  Other methods of enforcement.
     Enforcement of judgment may also be effected, if the Trial Division of the High Court deems justice requires and so orders by the appointment of a receiver, or receivers, by taking possession of property and disposing of it in accordance with the orders of the Court, or by a civil action on the judgment, or in any other manner known to American common law or common in courts in the United States.

Source:  TT Code 1966 285; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 4; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 4.

Case annotations:  The courts must apply three guidelines in determining whether a decision should be given retroactive effect.  First, the decision, to be applied non-retroactively, must establish a new principle of law, either by overruling clear past precedent on which litigants may have relied or by deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.  Second, the court must weigh the merits and demerits in each case by looking to the prior history of the rule in question, its purpose and effect, and whether retrospective operation will further or retard its operation.  Finally, the court must weigh the inequity imposed by retroactive application. Innocenti v. Wainit, 2 FSM Intrm. 173, 185-86 (App. 1986).

Default Judgments

Courts generally disfavor default judgments and readily set them aside rather than deprive a party of the opportunity to contest a claim on the merits.  Lonno v. Trust Territory (III), 1 FSM Intrm. 279, 280 (Kos. 1984).

In the interest of the finality of legal proceedings, the court will not set aside a default judgment in a case in which the defendant had access to legal advice yet failed to make a timely defense of the case and presented no meritorious defense, although the plaintiff could not be prejudiced if the default judgment were set aside.  Truk Transp. Co. v. Trans Pacific Import Ltd., 3 FSM Intrm. 440, 444 (Truk 1988).

Where the defendant had satisfied a default judgment and the judgment was later set aside, the court will order the amount received by the plaintiff paid into an account under the control of the court pending final disposition of the case on the merits, where it appears that the plaintiff's health and place of residence are uncertain, and where the passage of time renders the plaintiff's ability to produce the amount more uncertain, should the outcome of the case require this. Morris v. Truk, 3 FSM Intrm. 454, 458 (Truk 1988).

The clerk's office only has authority to grant default judgments for a sum certain or for a sum which can by computation be made certain.  Any award of attorney's fees must be based upon a judicial finding and thus is not for a sum certain and cannot be granted by the clerk.  Bank of the FSM v. Bartolome, 4 FSM Intrm. 182, 184 (Pon. 1990).

Where a plaintiff files an amended complaint without leave of court and no motion for leave was ever filed the court may order the amended complaint stricken from the record.  An entry of default based on such stricken amended complaint will be set aside. Berman v. FSM Supreme Court, 6 FSM Intrm. 109, 112-13 (Pon. 1993).

Entry of a default judgment is a two step process.  There must first be an entry of default before a default judgment can be entered.  A default judgment can then be entered, by the clerk if it is for a sum certain; otherwise it must be entered by the court. Poll v. Paul, 6 FSM Intrm. 324, 325 (Pon. 1994).

An improperly filed amended complaint cannot serve as the basis for a default judgment.  Berman v. FSM Supreme Court (II), 7 FSM Intrm. 11, 16 (App. 1995).
 
Relief from Judgment

Rule 60(b)(6) of the FSM Rules of Civil Procedure permits the court to relieve a party from judgment for any reason justifying the relief. Bank of the FSM v. Bartolome, 4 FSM Intrm. 182, 184 (Pon. 1990).

A motion for relief of a partial summary judgment under Civil Rule 59(e) is subject to a strict time limit of 10 days which cannot be enlarged by the court.  Such a motion filed 10 months later is untimely.  This very strict deadline cannot be avoided by an unsupported assertion that a copy of the judgment was not served.  Kihara Real Estate, Inc. v. Estate of Nanpei (II), 6 FSM Intrm. 354, 355-56 (Pon. 1994).

While Civil Rule 60(a) may be used to correct clerical errors in a judgment such as those of transcription, copying, or calculation it cannot be used to obtain relief for acts deliberately done.  Therefore where the court deliberately intended to enter in a judgment the amount prayed for in a party's motion and that amount is based on a special master's report not before the court, the party cannot obtain relief under Rule 60(a) for errors in the special master's report. Senda v. Mid-Pacific Constr. Co., 6 FSM Intrm. 440, 444-45 (App. 1994).

When a motion for relief from judgment is made pursuant to Civil Rule 60(b)(1), (2), or (3) the court must consider whether it was made within a reasonable time even when it is made within the one year time limit.  Senda v. Mid-Pacific Constr. Co., 6 FSM Intrm. 440, 445-46 (App. 1994).

Relief from judgment cannot be granted when judgment was granted on two separate grounds and relief is only sought from one of the grounds.  However, if meritorious, the record may be corrected to show that one of the grounds ought to be stricken. Setik v. FSM, 6 FSM Intrm. 446, 448 (Chk. 1994).

Failure of counsel to exercise due diligence in searching for "newly discovered" evidence is sufficient and independent grounds for denial of a motion for relief from judgment under FSM Civil Rule 60(b)(2). Nena v. Kosrae (III), 6 FSM Intrm. 564, 567 (App. 1994).

The purpose of Civil Rule 60(b) is to provide the trial court with a tool for navigating between the conflicting principles that litigation must be brought to an end and that justice should be done.  Mid-Pacific Constr. Co. v. Senda, 7 FSM Intrm. 129, 133 (Pon. 1995).

Civil Rule 60(b) does not afford relief to a party where the errors complained of were calculated by that party, submitted to the court by that party, and judicially noticed upon that party's request, because it is apparent that that party seeks relief from the insufficient preparation, the carelessness, and the neglect of its own counsel.  Mid-Pacific Constr. Co. v. Senda, 7 FSM Intrm. 129, 135 (Pon. 1995).
 
A party may be estopped from seeking Rule 60(b)(1) relief from acts voluntarily undertaken by that party.  Mid-Pacific Constr. Co. v. Senda, 7 FSM Intrm. 129, 135 (Pon. 1995).

Even where a request for Rule 60(b) relief is filed within the stated one-year time limit, a court still must examine whether the filing was made within a "reasonable time."  In determining this issue, the court reviews all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the case and may require the party seeking Rule 60 relief to offer a sufficient explanation for not having taken appropriate action in a more timely manner.Mid-Pacific Constr. Co. v. Senda, 7 FSM Intrm. 129, 136 (Pon. 1995).

      1405.  Writs of attachment.

     (1)     Writs of attachment may be issued only by the Trial Division of the High Court for special cause shown, supported by statement under oath. Such writs when so issued shall authorize and require the chief of police, any policeman, or other person named therein, to attach and safely keep so much of the personal property of the person against whom the writ is issued as will be sufficient to satisfy the demand set forth in the action, including interest and costs.  The chief of police, policeman, or other person named in the writ shall not attach any personal property which is exempt from attachment, nor any kinds or types of personal property which the Court may specify in the writ.

     (2)     Debts payable to the defendant may be similarly attached by special order issued by the Trial Division of the High Court, which shall exempt from the attachment so much of any salary or wages as the Court deems necessary for the support of the person against whom the order is issued or his dependents.

Source:  TT Code 1966 280; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 51; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 51.

Editor's note:  Changes were made in the phraseology of the 1966 edition of the Trust Territory Code.  In subsection (1) the phrase "supported by statement of the High Court for special cause shown," is deleted to correct an error in the 1982 edition of the FSM Code.  See errata below.

Errata: In 6 F.S.M.C. 1405(1), delete "supported by statement by High Court for special cause shown, ".

Case annotations:  The statutes concerning writs of execution protect certain property of the debtor from execution but contain no suggestion that other creditors can obtain rights superior to that of the judgment creditor in property covered by a writ of execution.  Bank of Guam v. Island Hardware, Inc., 2 FSM Intrm. 282, 285 (Pon. 1986).

While the statute authorizing execution against "the personal property of the person against whom the judgment has been rendered" contains no exceptions for third party creditors, neither does it purport to sweep away pre-existing property rights, including security interests, of such creditors, nor does the statute authorize the sale of property owned by others which happens to be in possession of the debtor at the time of execution.  6 FSMC 1407.   Bank of Guam v. Island Hardware, Inc., 2 FSM Intrm. 281, 285 (Pon. 1986).

A writ of attachment is a process by which property is seized and held to satisfy an established debt or prospective judgment and may only issue against the property of a defendant debtor.  The property of a third party, to which the debtor has no possessory rights , may not be seized, held, and eventually sold to satisfy the obligations of the debtor.  Pan Oceania Maritime Servs. (Guam) Ltd. v. Micronesia Shipping, 7 FSM Intrm. 37, 38 (Pon. 1995).

That a defendant debtor is a shareholder of a corporation that might receive a favorable settlement in the future and might pay a dividend to its shareholders does not entitle creditors to attach that corporation's assets.  Pan Oceania Maritime Servs. (Guam) Ltd. v. Micronesia Shipping, 7 FSM Intrm. 37, 39 (Pon. 1995).

      1406.  Release and modification.
     The Trial Division of the High Court, upon application of either party or of its own motion, may make and, from time to time, modify such orders as it deems just for the release of property from attachment or for the sale thereof if perishable or if the owner of the property shall so request, and for the safekeeping of the proceeds of the sale.

Source:  TT Code 1966 281; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 52; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 52.

      1407.  Writs of execution.
     Every court, at the request of the party recovering any civil judgment in that court for the payment of money, shall issue a writ of execution against the personal property of the party against whom the judgment has been rendered, except as provided in section 1415 of this chapter.

Source: TT Code 1966 286; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 53; COM PL 4C_21 1; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 53.

Case annotations:  The statutes concerning writs of execution protect certain property of the debtor from execution but contain no suggestion that other creditors can obtain rights superior to that of the judgment creditor in property covered by a writ of execution.  Bank of Guam v. Island Hardware, Inc., 2 FSM Intrm. 281, 285 (Pon. 1986).

Attachment and seizure create statutory and possessory lien rights which will be unaffected by subsequent writs of execution, but will be subject to national government's wage and salary tax lien claims under 54 FSMC 135(2), to wage claims of low level employees and laborers, and to pre-existing nat'l gov't lien rights under 54 FSMC 153.  In re Mid-Pacific Constr. Co., 3 FSM Intrm. 292, 303 (Pon. 1988).

An execution creditor holds a more powerful position than a mere judgment creditor.In re Mid-Pacific Constr. Co., 3 FSM Intrm. 292, 306 (Pon. 1988).

Writs of execution will not be granted on an automatic basis, but only when it has been shown that judgment creditors have seriously explored the possibility of satisfying the judgment through other means, in order to avoid bankruptcies or economic hardships.  In re Mid-Pacific Constr. Co., 3 FSM Intrm. 292, 306 (Pon. 1988).

Where it becomes apparent that claims or creditors will outstrip the value of debtor's assets, the approach is to give all creditors an opportunity to submit claims, and distribute any available proceeds on an equitable basis.  In re Mid-Pacific Constr. Co., 3 FSM Intrm. 292, 306 (Pon. 1988).

Where purchasers at a judicial sale are not served by summons and complaint pursuant to FSM Civil Rule 3 but receive notice of a motion seeking confirmation of the sale and made by a creditor of the party whose property was sold, and where the purchasers do not object to the motion, confirmation of the sale is effective and binding on the purchasers and is not violative of their rights of due process. Sets v. Island Hardware, 3 FSM Intrm. 365, 368 (Pon. 1988).

Creditors with judgments more than 10 days old are entitled to writs of execution upon request.  In re Pacific Islands Distributing Co., 3 FSM Intrm. 575, 584 (Pon. 1988).

Although technically attachment and garnishment are distinct processes, attachment applying to assets in the defendant's possession and garnishment involving assets in the possession of a third party, the statutory language regarding attachment would seem to apply to both cases.  Bank of Guam v. Elwise, 4 FSM Intrm. 150, 152 (Pon. 1989).

Although there is no provision for garnishment in Pohnpei state law nor any national statute explicitly providing for garnishment, garnishment of wages is an acceptable means for enforcing an unpaid judgment, pursuant to the FSM Supreme Court's statutory "general powers," its power to enforce judgments in any manner common in courts in the United States, and its power to issue writs of attachment.  Bank of Guam v. Elwise, 4 FSM Intrm. 150, 152 (Pon. 1989).

The requirements and procedures for issuing a writ of garnishment should be the same as those applied to attachment proceedings.  Bank of Guam v. Elwise, 4 FSM Intrm. 150, 152 (Pon. 1989).

FSM Supreme Court's power to issue writs of garnishment is clearly discretionary. Bank of Guam v. Elwise, 4 FSM Intrm. 150, 152 (Pon. 1989).

Where garnishment is warranted, then anything beyond what is reasonably necessary for the defendant to support himself and his dependents can be garnished.  Bank of Guam v. Elwise, 4 FSM Intrm. 150, 153 (Pon. 1989).

Among execution creditors the claims of those whose writs are dated earliest have priority to an insolvent's assets over those whose writs are dated later.  Individual writ-holders are to be paid on the basis of first-in-time, first-in-right rule according to the dates of their writs.  Western Sales Trading Co. v. Ponape Federation of Coop. Ass'ns, 6 FSM Intrm. 592, 593 (Pon. 1994).

While the statute authorizing execution against "the personal property of the person against whom the judgment has been rendered" contains no exceptions for third party creditors, neither does it purport to sweep away pre-existing property rights, including security interests, of such creditors, nor does the statute authorize the sale of property owned by others which happens to be in possession of the debtor at the time of execution.  6 FSMC 1407.  Bank of Guam v. Island Hardware, Inc., 2 FSM Intrm. 281, 285 (Pon. 1986).

A writ of execution may issue without seriously exploring other possible means of satisfying the judgment.  House of Travel v. Neth, 7 FSM Intrm. 228, 229 (Pon. 1994).

Execution may be had against a judgment debtor's non-exempt personal property, not against his interests in land.  House of Travel v. Neth, 7 FSM Intrm. 228, 229 (Pon. 1994).

Personal property is property other than land or interests in land.  House of Travel v. Neth, 7 FSM Intrm. 228, 229 (Pon. 1994).

Property may not be taken by government, even in aid of a judgment, without due process of law.  In executing the writ, due process of law may be assured by directing the executing officer to comply strictly with the statutory provisions for levying a writ of execution.  House of Travel v. Neth, 7 FSM Intrm. 228, 229-30 (Pon. 1994).

      1408.  Levying execution.
     Every chief of police, policeman, or other person duly authorized receiving a writ of execution issued by any court, shall levy or cause a chief of police or policeman to levy execution as follows:

     (1)     Demand of payment - Seizure of property.  He shall demand of the person against whom the execution is issued, if he may be found within the municipality where the levy is being attempted, that the person pay the execution or exhibit sufficient property subject to execution.  If such person has property of a kind exempt from execution but to an amount exceeding the exemption, he may select the portion of this property provided by law which he desires to retain under the exemption, providing he makes this selection known promptly to the person making the levy.  Otherwise, the person making the levy shall make the selection.  If the person against whom the execution is issued does not pay the execution in full, including interest and costs and expenses thereof, the person making the levy shall take into his possession property of the person against whom the execution is issued, not exempt from execution, sufficient in his opinion to cover the amount of the execution.  He shall take first any property under attachment in the action in which the execution was issued; next, property, if any, indicated by the person against whom the execution was issued.  He may, if he thinks best, remove the property to a safe place, or place a caretaker in charge of it. He shall make a list of the property levied upon.

     (2)     Notice of sale.  The person making the levy shall, after levy, give public notice of the sale at least seven days in advance of the time and place of sale, by notifying the magistrate of the municipality or municipalities in which the levy was made, by posting a written notice of the sale in a conspicuous place at or near the municipal office in the municipality in which the sale is to be held, and must notify the person against whom the execution is issued, if he can be found within the municipality or municipalities where the levy was made, or notify any agent who had custody of the property levied upon at the time of levy.

     (3)     Sale - Procedure - Disposition of proceeds.  The person making the levy on the day and at the place set for the sale, unless payment has been made of the amount of the judgment and interest and the costs and expenses in connection with the levy, shall sell the property levied upon at public auction to the highest bidder.  He shall deduct from the proceeds of the sale sufficient money for the full payment of his fees and expenses, and shall then pay the person in whose favor the execution was issued, or his counsel, such balance as remains up to the amount due on the execution.  If there are any proceeds of the sale left after the deduction and payment directed above, such remaining proceeds shall be paid over to the person against whom the execution was issued.  The person making the levy shall then return the writ to the court with a report of his doings thereon, showing the amounts collected and paid out thereon.

Editor's note:  The word "properly" has been revised to "property" to correct a typographical error made in the 1982 edition of this code.

     (4)     Postponement of sale.  Whenever a request in writing signed by the debtor and creditor for a postponement of the sale to an agreed date and hour is given to the person conducting the sale under execution, such person shall thereupon by public declaration postpone the sale to the day and hour so fixed in such request and at the place originally fixed by the person for the sale.  In the case of postponements, notice of each thereof must be given by public declaration by the person conducting the sale at the time and place last appointed for the sale.  No other notice of postponed sale need be given.

     (5)     Completion of sale by person other than one making levy.  If a chief of police, policeman, or other person duly authorized starts to levy execution and for any reason is prevented from or fails to complete the matter, any chief of police, policeman, or other person duly authorized may complete the levy, sale, and payment of proceeds as provided in this section.

Source: TT Code 1966 287; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 54; COM PL 4C_21 2; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 54.

      1409.  Orders in aid of judgment - Application.
     At any time after a finding for the payment of money by one party to another and before any judgment based thereon has been satisfied in full, either party may apply to the Court for an order in aid of judgment.  Thereupon the Court, after notice to the opposite party, shall hold a hearing on the question of the debtor's ability to pay and determine the fastest manner in which the debtor can reasonably pay a judgment based on the finding.  In making this determination the Court shall allow the debtor to retain such property and such portion of his income as may be necessary to provide the reasonable living requirements of the debtor and his dependents, including fulfillment of any obligations he may have to any clan, lineage, or other similar group, in return for which obligations he, or his dependents, receive any necessary part of the food, goods, shelter, or services required for their living.

Source:  TT Code 1966 289; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 55; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 55.

1410.  Orders in aid of judgment - Hearings.

     (1)     At the hearing provided by section 1409 of this chapter, the debtor may be examined orally before the Court, or the Court may refer the examination to a single judge of the Court or to a master to take evidence and report his findings.  In either case any evidence properly bearing on the question may be introduced by either party or by the Court, the single judge or master in the same manner as at the trial of a civil action.  Upon having heard the evidence or having received the report of the single judge or master, the Court shall make such order in aid of judgment as is just for the payment of any judgment based on the finding.

     (2)     This order in aid of judgment may provide for the transfer of particular assets at a price determined by the Court, or for the sale of particular assets and payment of the net proceeds to the creditor, or for payments, in specified installments on particular dates or at specified intervals, or for any other method of payment which the Court deems just.

Source: TT Code 1966 290; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 56; COM PL 4C_21 3; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 56.

      1411.  Orders in aid of judgment - Modification of orders.
     Any order in aid of judgment made under this chapter may be modified by the Court as justice may require, at any time, upon application of either party and notice to the other, or on the Court's own motion.

Source:  TT Code 1966 291; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 57; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 57.

      1412.  Orders in aid of judgment - Punishment of violations.
     If any debtor fails without good cause to comply with any order in aid of judgment made under this chapter, he may be adjudged in contempt as a civil matter, after notice to show cause why he should not be so adjudged and an opportunity to be heard thereon, and upon such adjudication shall be committed to jail until he complies with the order or is released by the Court or serves a period fixed by the Court of not more than six months in jail, whichever happens first.

Source:  TT Code 1966 292; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 58; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 58.

      1413.  Orders in aid of judgment - Stay of execution.

     (1)     After an application for an order in aid of judgment has been filed in any action, no writ of execution shall be issued therein except under an order in aid of judgment as provided in this chapter, or by special order of the court for cause shown.

     (2)     If a writ of execution is outstanding, a judgment creditor applying for an order in aid of judgment shall file the writ of execution with his application, and a judgment debtor applying for an order in aid of judgment may request a stay of execution which may be granted by the Court on such terms, if any, as it deems just.

Source:  TT Code 1966 293; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 59; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 59.

      1414.  Orders in aid of judgment - Application to community or District court.
     A judgment creditor who has obtained an execution may, instead of applying to the court in which the action was tried, apply for an order in aid of judgment to the District court or community court within whose jurisdiction the judgment debtor lives or has his usual place of business or employment.  The court so applied to shall then proceed with notice to the opposite party, hearing, determination, and the issuance of such order in aid of judgment as it deems just, as provided in this chapter.

Source:  TT Code 1966 294; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 60; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 60.
 
      1415.  Exemptions.
     The following described property shall be exempt from attachment and execution:

     (1)     Personal and household goods.  All necessary household furniture, cooking and eating utensils, and all necessary wearing apparel, bedding, and provisions for household use sufficient for four months.

     (2)     Necessities for trade or occupation.  All tools, implements, utensils, two work animals, and equipment necessary to enable the person against whom the attachment or execution is issued to carry on his usual occupation.

     (3)     Land and interests in land.  All interests in land, but any interest owned solely by a judgment debtor, in his own right, may be ordered sold or transferred under an order in aid of judgment if the court making the order deems that justice so requires and finds as a fact that after the sale or transfer, the debtor will have sufficient land remaining to support himself and those persons directly dependent on him according to recognized local custom and the law of the Trust Territory.  No person not an indigenous inhabitant of the Trust Territory may acquire any interest in such land by sale, transfer, or otherwise, except with the prior approval of the High Commissioner.

Source: TT Code 1966 288; TT Code 1970, 8 TTC 61; TT Code 1980, 8 TTC 61.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
[uboPuxE`9:p+nD+en*=[4cz:T~Dl8^)'3OliǛ w^b9)Eڀ 6|K2gfCMok?jz.=rn8r! YOe Bk0mmCHm^9>'.oSLI?N-Ee9TX ;;ied4i Z1wFv$f܅~޳R