Narruhn v Chuuk State Election Commission [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013) (18 April 2013)

CHUUK STATE SUPREME COURT TRIAL DIVISION

CSSC CA NO. 031-2013

ALEXANDER R. NARRUHN and WILLIE W3 WILLIANDER,
Plaintiffs,

vs.

CHUUK STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, Commissioner JOHN YLIAIZA, Commissioner RUFUS PETEWON, Commissioner SONDAK GIDIEON, Commissioner ANGELINO ROSOKOW, and Commissioner ANANTER YEAR,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________

ORDER

Repeat R. Samuel
Associate Justice

Decided: April 18, 2013

APPEARANCES:

For the Plaintiffs: Kasio Mida, Jr., Esq.

Ramp & Mida Law Firm

P.O. Box 1480

Kolonia, Pohnpei FM 96941

For the Defendants: Johnny Meippen, Esq.

P.O. Box 705

Weno, Chuuk FM 96942

* * * *

HEADNOTES

Civil Procedure - Injunctions
A court may issue a preliminary injunction where the following four factors are met and the exigencies of the situation demand such relief: 1) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of the case; 2) a substantial threat of irreparable injury if the preliminary injunction is denied; 3) the benefit to the plaintiff in obtaining the injunction outweighs the harm the defendants will experience; and 4) granting the preliminary injunction will not disserve the public interest. The moving party bears the burden of proof in a motion for injunctive relief. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 651 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

Civil Procedure - Injunctions
Injunctive relief is preventative in nature and it is not necessary to wait for the actual occurrence of the injury. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 651 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

Civil Procedure - Injunctions
When a final judgment has been entered on the merits, a preliminary injunction comes to an end and is superseded by the final order. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 651 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

Civil Procedure - Judgment on the Pleadings
After the pleadings are closed but within such time as not to delay the trial, any party may move for judgment on the pleadings. Such a motion must be granted if the moving party demonstrates that no material fact is in dispute and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law but, when matters outside the pleadings are presented in the motion for judgment on the pleadings, the court must treat the motion as one for summary judgment under Rule 56. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 651 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

Civil Procedure - Judgment on the Pleadings
The standard for evaluating a motion for judgment on the pleadings is almost identical to that for evaluating a summary judgment motion. A motion for judgment on the pleadings must be granted only when the movant has demonstrated that there are no issues of material fact, and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The moving party must carry its burden by reference solely to the pleadings, and the court must evaluate all facts and inferences in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 651 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

Civil Procedure - Summary Judgment - Grounds
Summary judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. The court must view the facts presented and inferences made in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. The moving party has the burden of showing a lack of triable issues of fact. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 651-52 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

Civil Procedure - Judgment on the Pleadings; Civil Procedure - Summary Judgment
When the parties rely on declarations beyond the pleadings themselves, the court will treat the plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings as a summary judgment motion. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 652 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

Elections - Conduct
All Chuuk Election Commissioners must remain neutral to avoid any/all appearances of impropriety, and to be available for any quorum following an election. Additionally, all persons holding a position in the Chuuk State Election Commission must strictly adhere to the mandates of the election laws. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 652 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

Elections - Conduct
All Chuuk Election Commissioners are permanently enjoined from traveling from Chuuk for the purposes of conducting the election at the voting sites and from appearing in person at the voting locations for the purposes of conducting the election at the voting sites. Narruhn v. Chuuk State Election Comm'n, [2013] FMCSC 4; 18 FSM Intrm. 649, 652 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2013).

* * * *

COURT'S OPINION

REPEAT R. SAMUEL, Associate Justice:

The Court finds that Plaintiff, Alexander R. Narruhn and Willie W3 Williander ("Plaintiffs") filed a Complaint for Injunctive Relief and Declaratory Relief; and Defendants Chuuk State Election Commission, Commissioner John Yliaiza, Commissioner Rufus Petewon, Commissioner Sondak Gidieon, Commissioner Angelino Rosokow and Commissioner Ananter Year ("Defendants") consented to the Court's jurisdiction personally and over the subject matter of this action, consented to the entry of this Order of Permanent Injunction. Defendant admits the allegations of the Complaint asking for a finding against the Defendants. By their Consent, which has been previously filed, Defendants waive the Entry of Findings and Conclusions of Law, and consents to the entry of this Permanent Injunction.

Legal Standards

A court may issue a preliminary injunction where the following four factors are met and the exigencies of the situation demand such relief: (1) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of the case; (2) a substantial threat of irreparable injury if the preliminary injunction is denied; (3) the benefit to the plaintiff in obtaining the injunction outweighs the harm the defendants will experience; and (4) granting the preliminary injunction will not disserve the public interest. Ponape Enterprises Co. v. Bergen, [1993] FMSC 52; 6 FSM Intrm. 286, 288 (Pon. 1993); Ponape Transfer & Storage v. Federated Shipping Co., [1987] FMSC 14; 3 FSM Intrm. 174, 177 (Pon. 1987). The moving party bears the burden of proof in a motion for injunctive relief. Injunctive relief is preventative in nature and it is not necessary to wait for the actual occurrence of the injury. Id. A preliminary injunction lasts until dissolved or until the case is disposed of on the merits. When a final judgment has been entered on the merits, a preliminary injunction comes to an end and is superseded by the final order. Damarlane v. United States, [1997] FMSC 33; 8 FSM Intrm. 45, 54 (App. 1997).

The Plaintiff moves for Judgment on the Pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Chuuk State Rules of Civil Procedure, which provides, "[a]fter the pleadings are closed but within such time as not to delay the trial, any party may move for judgment on the pleadings." Such a motion "shall be granted if the moving party demonstrates that no material fact is in dispute and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Where matters outside the pleadings are presented in the motion for judgment on the pleadings, the court must treat the motion as one for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Chk. Civ. R. 12(c).

Under Rule 56, summary judgment must be granted when "the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving part is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Chk. Civ. R.56(c).

The standard for evaluating a motion for judgment on the pleadings is almost identical to that for evaluating a motion for summary judgment. A motion for judgment on the pleadings shall be granted only when the movant has demonstrated that there are no issues of material fact, and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The moving party must carry its burden by reference solely to the pleadings, and the court must evaluate all facts and inferences in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Kyowa Sipping Co. v. Wade, [1995] FMSC 15; 7 FSM Intrm. 93, 96 (Pon. 1995).

Summary judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. The court must view the facts presented and inferences made in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. The moving party has the burden of showing a lack of triable issues of fact. Western Sales Trading Co. (Phils) v. B & J Corp., [2006] FMSC 29; 14 FSM Intrm. 423, 425 (Chk. 2006).

Since the parties rely on declarations beyond the pleadings themselves, the Court treats Plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings as a motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, the Court agrees that summary judgment should be entered for the Plaintiff. It is ordered, adjudged, and decreed:

1. The Due Process Violation and Civil Rights Violation cause of action, are hereby dismissed.

2. The consent of Defendants is incorporated herein with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein, and that Defendants shall comply with all of the undertakings and agreements set for the therein.

3. All Chuuk Election Commissioners must remain neutral to avoid any/all appearances of impropriety, and to be available for any quorum following an election. Additionally, all persons holding a position in the Chuuk State Election Commission must strictly adhere to the mandates of the election laws. Defendants and all persons holding a position in the Chuuk State Election Commission from henceforth, shall comply with all of the terms of this Order for Permanent Injunction.

4. Defendants, are hereby permanently enjoined from: traveling from the State of Chuuk, for the purposes of conducting the election at the voting sites and from appearing in person at the voting locations for the purposes of conducting the election at the voting sites.

5. It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that this Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purposes of enforcing the terms of this Order for Permanent Injunction.

The Court is considering reducing the bond to the exact amount that the Defendants are claiming. It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that Defendants must provide actual evidence of actual expenses that the bond should cover. Absent a verifiable showing of actual expenses or a demonstration of a further need for the withholding, bond will be released in 30 days from entry of this Order.

There being no just reason for delay, pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the Clerk is ordered to enter a final judgment forthwith and without further notice.

* * * *