CHUUK STATE SUPREME COURT TRIAL DIVISION
Cite as Konman v. Adobad
11 FSM Intrm. 34 ( Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2002)
 
[11 FSM Intrm. 34]
 
PAULUS KONMAN,
Plaintiff,
 
vs.
 
RICHARD ADOBAD et al.,
Defendants.
 
CSSC-CA-NO. 76-99
 
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
 
Wanis R. Simina
Associate Justice
 
Decided: June 25, 2002
 
APPEARANCES:
 
For the Plaintiff:                      Nelson Stephen
                                                 Micronesian Legal Services Corporation
                                                 P.O. Box D
                                                 Weno, Chuuk FM 96942
 
For the Defendants:              Ready Johnny, Esq.
                                                Attorney General
                                                Office of the Chuuk Attorney General
                                                P.O. Box 189
                                                Weno, Chuuk FM 96942

* * * *

HEADNOTES

Civil Procedure ) Motions
     A pending motion to dismiss that involves only matters of law can be decided without hearing. Konman v. Adobad, 11 FSM Intrm. 34, 35 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2002).
 
Judgments
     The Chuuk State Supreme Court may correct any errors in judgments or orders resulting from oversight or omission prior to final judgment, which under Rule 54 does not occur until the rights and duties of all parties have been finally determined. Konman v. Adobad, 11 FSM Intrm. 34, 35 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2002).
 
[11 FSM Intrm. 35]
 
Civil Procedure ) Dismissal; Sovereign Immunity ) Chuuk
     When state law clearly provides that no action shall be brought against the state for any actions or omissions of the Chuuk Coconut Authority and that the Authoritys debts or obligations shall not be debts or obligations of the Legislature or state government, and neither will be responsible for the same, the state and the governor will be dismissed as defendants from a suit against the Authority because as a matter of law no action lies against the state and no liability attaches. Konman v. Adobad, 11 FSM Intrm. 34, 35 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2002).
 
Judgments
     When an offer of judgment and an acceptance of offer of judgment were made solely between the plaintiff and one defendant and neither party had the power to bind the other defendants to any judgment by such offer and acceptance, the judgment will be modified under Civil Rule 60(a) to clearly reflect that the judgment is only against the one defendant. Konman v. Adobad, 11 FSM Intrm. 34, 35-36 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2002).

* * * *

COURTS OPINION

WANIS R. SIMINA, Associate Justice:

      Whereas, the Court ) in reviewing the files, pleadings and records in the within action in anticipation of ruling on Plaintiffs Motion for an Order in Aid of Judgment having discovered that Defendants Ansito Walter and Chuuk State had filed a Motion to Dismiss on July 29, 1999 which was still pending and without decision, and that said motion involves only matters of law which can be decided without hearing, and

     Whereas, the Court further having discovered that the Offer of Judgment and Acceptance of Offer of Judgment upon which the Judgment herein was based were made by Plaintiff and Defendant Chuuk Coconut Authority, without the participation or agreement of Defendants Walter and Chuuk State, and

     Whereas, the Court is authorized by CSSC Civil Rule 60(a) to correct any errors in judgments or orders resulting from oversight or omission prior to final judgment, which pursuant to CSSC Civil Rule 54 does not occur until the rights and duties of all parties have been finally determined, and good cause appearing,

     Now Therefore, the Court makes the following orders:

     1. The Motion to Dismiss of Defendants Ansito Walter and Chuuk State, based upon the clear language of Truk S.L. No. 1-1-12, must be and it hereby is granted. Truk S.L. No. 1-1-12 clearly provides, at 4(7) that no action shall be brought against the state for any actions or omissions of Defendant Chuuk Coconut Authority, and further provides at 9 that "The debts or obligations of the Authority shall not be debts or obligations of the . . . . [Chuuk] Legislature or [Chuuk] State Government, and neither the . . . [Chuuk] Legislature or [Chuuk] State Government . . . shall be responsible for the same." (emphasis and internal changes added). Since as a matter of law no action against Chuuk State lies, and no liability of Chuuk State attaches, the motion to dismiss was properly made and is hereby granted, and Defendants Ansito Walter and Chuuk State are due to be, and they hereby are, dismissed from this action.

     2. The Court finds that the Offer of Judgment and Acceptance of Offer of Judgment made on

[11 FSM Intrm. 36]

February 1, 2001 were made solely between Plaintiff and Defendant Chuuk Coconut Authority, and that neither party had the power to bind Defendants Ansito Walter and Chuuk State to any judgment by such Offer and Acceptance. Therefore, the Judgment herein is modified pursuant to CSSC Civil Rule 60(a) to clearly reflect that: Plaintiff Paulus Konman shall have judgment against Defendant Chuuk Coconut Authority only in the sum of $15,000.00, plus simple interest thereon at the legal rate of 9% per annum from February 8, 2001.

     3. Plaintiffs Motion for an Order in Aid of Judgment is hereby denied without prejudice, on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to demonstrate any attempts to recover the stipulated judgment sum from the only Defendant obligated on the judgment, the Chuuk Coconut Authority, prior to the bringing of the motion.

     All parties are hereby notified that this is the final judgment in this matter, and that rights of appeal run from the date of entry of this Order and Judgment.

* * * *