Ikanur v Director of Education [1995] FMCSC 8; 7 FSM Intrm. 275 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 1995) (13 July 1995)

CHUUK STATE SUPREME COURT
TRIAL DIVISION
Cite as Ikanur v Director of Education, [1995] FMCSC 8; 7 FSM Intrm. 275 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 1995)

LIAF IKANUR,
Plaintiff,

vs.

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION et al.,
Defendants.

CA No. 25-94

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND JUDGMENT

Soukichi Fritz
Chief Justice

Trial: July 5, 1995
Decided: July 13, 1995

APPEARANCE:

For the Plaintiff:
Frank Casiano, Trial Counselor
Micronesian Legal Services Corporation
P.O. Box D
Weno, Chuuk FM 96942

* * * *

HEADNOTES

Torts - Damages; Torts - Trespass
Where a defendant has trespassed on a plaintiff's land by constructing improvements thereon the measure of damages due the plaintiff is an amount equal to the fair market rental value of the land in the place located over the period of use, and also an amount for any damage to trees or food plants during the defendant's use of the property and for any conditions caused by the defendant's trespass and use such as the construction of a garbage dump. Ikanur v. Director of Educ., [1995] FMCSC 8; 7 FSM Intrm. 275, 277 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 1995).

Torts - Damages; Torts - Trespass
In a trespass case, a defendant who made improvements to the plaintiff's property is entitled to offset the value of the improvements against damages caused to the plaintiff's property during the trespass, but all improvements made by the defendant on land without the plaintiff's permission become the plaintiff's property and the defendant has no right to any further use of the improvements without the plaintiff's permission. Ikanur v. Director of Educ., [1995] FMCSC 8; 7 FSM Intrm. 275, 277 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 1995).

* * * *

COURT'S OPINION

SOUKICHI FRITZ, Chief Justice:

This matter was tried to the court on July 5, 1995. The plaintiff personally appeared and was represented by Mr. Frank Casiano of MLSC. None of the named defendants appeared or were represented by counsel, although the Chuuk State Attorney General's Office was the counsel of record and filed an answer denying the allegations. The court after reviewing all the papers and pleadings on file and after hearing the testimony presented and after listening to the argument of plaintiff's counsel makes the following findings of fact:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The plaintiff is the owner of a parcel of land known as Falangiang located in Puluwat Island, Chuuk State.

2. The defendants some time in 1984 entered plaintiff's land without her permission and made improvements thereon for the use of Pattiw Junior High School. The defendants built a building and a basketball court, dug a well and made a place for garbage. The defendants continued to use plaintiff's property until 1994.

3. The plaintiff was not compensated for this use.

4. The court finds that a trespass has occurred.

5. The court finds that other land owners in a similar situation were given the sum of $3000.00 for the rental of their land over a similar period of time. The court finds that no trees or other food plants were damaged during the trespass or use of the property by the defendants. The court further finds that any damage that has occurred as a result of the garbage dump is off-set by the improvements made by the defendants.

6. The court finds that plaintiff's four causes of action are all based on the same set of facts.

Upon these findings of fact the court makes the following conclusions of law.

Conclusions of Law

7. The court concludes that the defendants have trespassed upon plaintiff's property as alleged in the plaintiff's first cause of action.

8. The court concludes that plaintiff's second cause of action that alleges a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Chuuk State Constitution fails to state a cause of action separate from the trespass alleged.

9. The court concludes that plaintiff's third cause of action alleging a violation of her civil rights pursuant to 11 F.S.M.C. 701(3) fails to state a cause of action separate from the trespass alleged.

10. The court concludes that the plaintiff's fourth cause of action fails to state a cause of action separate from the trespass alleged.

11. The court concludes that the measure of damages the plaintiff is entitled to is an amount equal to the fair market rental value of the land in the place located over the period of use. The court further concludes that plaintiff is also entitled to be compensated for any damage to trees or food plants during the defendants' use of the property. The plaintiff is also entitled to damages for any conditions caused by the defendants' trespass and use such as the construction of a garbage dump. The further court concludes that the defendants are entitled to an off-set against damages caused based on the value of the improvements made to plaintiff's property during the defendants' trespass and use.

12. The court concludes that all improvement made by the defendants on plaintiff's land without her permission are now the property of the plaintiff and the defendants have no right to any further use of these improvements without plaintiff's permission.

Therefore based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law the court grants judgment as follows:

Judgment

It is

Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that the plaintiff shall have judgment against the defendants in the sum of $3000.00 on her first cause of action. It is further

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded nothing for her second, third and fourth causes of action and those causes of action are hereby dismissed. It is further

Ordered that all improvements made by the defendants on plaintiff's land are now the property of the plaintiff and that the defendants have no right to any further use of these improvements without first obtaining the plaintiff's permission. It is further

Ordered that each party shall bear its own costs.

* * * *