Pita v Garrett [2004] ASLawRp 44; 9 ASR3d 175 (9 July 2004)

OPINIONS

OF THE

LAND AND TITLES DIVISION

OF THE

HIGH COURT OF AMERICAN SAMOA

(2004)

VI'I PITA,
Plaintiff/Counterdefendant,

v.

MIRIAMA GARRETT and RICHARD GARRETT,
Defendants/Counterclaimants/Cross-Claimants,

v.

TERRITORIAL REGISTRAR and SURVEY MANAGER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, MEKO AIUMU,
Cross-Defendants.
____________________________________

TIMU LEVALE, by and on behalf of the TIMU FAMILY,
Plaintiffs,

v.

RAY McMOORE, SESE McMOORE, and IOANE FE'AFE'AGA ENE,
Defendants.
___________________________________

AMERICAN SAMOA GOVERNMENT,
Plaintiff,

v.

HEIRS OF IOANE FE'AFE'AGA ENE, aka MAUGA FE'AFE'AGA ENE, TOLANI TELESO FUGA, ELETISE MATAGI WOLMAN, SENEVEFA PRITT, TIMU LEVALE, on behalf of the TIMU FAMILY, RAY McMOORE, SESE McMOORE aka SESE SAGAPOLU, VI'I PITA, PERALITA CANDY FUAVAI, ZAUINAOLA LAUAMA, FIALE NIKO, aka SOVITA SUAFO'A, SOVITA LIVING TRUST, MIRIAMA GARRETT, AMERIKA
SAMOA BANK, and DOES 1-10,
Defendants.
____________________________________

TERRITORIAL REGISTRAR, on behalf of the HEIRS OF IOANE FE'AFE'AGA ENE,
Claimants,

v.

TELESIA FE'A FIAME, on behalf of the FE'A FAMILY, ELETISE MATAGI WOLMAN, SENOUEFA PRITT, TAUINOLA
LAUAMA, FUGA TOLANI TELESO, VI'I PITA, FIALE LARSON, aka FIALE NIKO, aka SOVITA SUAFOA, AND SOVITA LIVING TRUST,
Objectors.
_________________________________

SINAVAIANA M. ULUFALE, Administrator of the Estate of IOANE FE'AFE'AGA ENE,
Claimant,

v.

TELESIA FE'A FIAME, FA'AMOE I HOLEWYNE, AFOA L. SU'ESU'E LUTU, on behalf of PEARLITA FUAVAI, MARSHALL ASHLEY on behalf of ELETISE M. WOLMAN, SENOUEFUA RITT, TAUINAOLA LAUAMA, FUGA TELESO, VI'I PITA, FIALE LARSON, aka FIALE NIKO, aka SOVITA SUAFO'A, and SOVITA LIVING TRUST, and FE'AFE'AGA TAUAMO II,
Objectors.
________________________________

FA'AMAMAFA POLOA and LUSI POLOA,
Intervenors.

High Court of American Samoa
Land and Titles Division

LT No. 14-93
LT No. 20-93
LT No. 10-95
LT No. 20-96
LT No. 01-98

July 9, 2004

[1] The court will deny a second T.C.R.C.P. 60(b) motion that is based on the same grounds as a prior T.C.R.C.P. 60(b) motion.

[2] The court denied the motion for reconsideration, where the movant made the same arguments in a T.C.R.C.P. 60(b) motion as the arguments she made in a previous motion the court had classified as a T.C.R.C.P. 60(b) motion.

Before RICHMOND, Associate Justice, LOGOAI, Chief Associate Judge, and TAPOPO, Associate Judge.

Counsel: For Plaintiff/Counterdefendant/Defendant/Objector Vi'i Pita, and Defendants/Objectors Tolani Teleso Fuga, Eletise Matagi Wolman, Senouefa Pritt, Tauinaola Lauama, Fiale Niko, Sovita Living Trust, and Objector Marshall Ashley, Marshall Ashley and David P. Vargas
For Defendants/Counterclaimants/Cross-Claimants Miriama Garrett and Richard Garrett, Defendant Ioane Fe'afe'aga Ene, Claimants Sinaviana M. Ulufale, Administrator, and Estate of Ioane Fe'afe'aga Ene, David Wagner
For Defendant Peralita Candy Fuavai, and Objector Afoa L. Su'esu'e Lutu, Afoa L. Su'esu'e Lutu
For Objectors Telesia Fe'a-Fiame and Fe'afe'aga Tauamo II, Robert K. Maez
For Intervenors Fa'amamafa Poloai and Lusi Poloai, Katopau T. Ainuu

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

We denied Objector Telesia Fe‟a Fiame‟s ("Fiame") motion for relief from judgment and for a new trial. Pita v. Garrett, 8 A.S.R.3d 234 (Land and Titles Div. 2004). Fiame moves for reconsideration.

[1]-[2] We deny a second T.C.R.C.P. 60(b) motion that is based on the same grounds as a prior T.C.R.C.P. 60(b) motion. Tupuola v. Williams, 8 A.S.R.3d 270 (Land and Titles Div. 2004). Here, Fiame presents no new grounds for why we should reconsider our classification of the argument. Rehashing the actions of her prior counsel, Fiame makes essentially the same argument that we classified as T.C.R.C.P. 60(b)(1) when denying her motion for relief from judgment or new trial. Accordingly, we deny her motion for reconsideration.

Order

The objector‟s motion for reconsideration is denied.

It is so ordered.

**********