Asor v National Election Director [2005] FMSC 8; 13 FSM Intrm. 205 (App. 2005) (15 April 2005)

FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA
SUPREME COURT APPELLATE DIVISION
Cite case as Asor v National Election Director, [2005] FMSC 8; 13 FSM Intrm. 205 (App. 2005)

SABINO ASOR,
Appellant,

vs.

NATIONAL ELECTION DIRECTOR, and SIMIRAM

SIPENUK, as the real party in interest,
Appellees.

____________________________________________

APPEAL CASE NO. C3-2005

BEFORE:
Hon. Andon L. Amaraich, Chief Justice, FSM Supreme Court
Hon. Martin G. Yinug, Associate Justice, FSM Supreme Court
Hon. Dennis K. Yamase, Associate Justice, FSM Supreme Court

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Decided: April 15, 2005

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant:
Johnny Meippen, Esq.
P.O. Box 705
Weno, Chuuk FM 96942

For the Appellee (Director):
Matthew L. Olmsted, Esq.
FSM Department of Justice
P.O. Box PS-105
Palikir, Pohnpei FM 96941

[2005] FMKSC 4; [13 FSM Intrm. 206]

For the Appellee (real party in interest):
Fredrick Hartman
P.O. Box 222
Weno, Chuuk FM 96942

* * * *

HEADNOTE

Appellate Review - Dismissal
When the ground for the appellee’s motion to dismiss is that the appeal was filed prematurely and this is the same ground, based on essentially the same facts, as the same appellee’s motion to dismiss a different appeal case and that motion was granted and that other appeal dismissed, the appellee’s motion to dismiss this appeal will be granted and this appeal will be dismissed and this appeal will also be dismissed on the ground that it has been abandoned since the appellant indicated orally he intended to dismiss his appeal and then filed no response to the appellee’s motion to dismiss. Asor v. National Election Dir., [2005] FMSC 8; 13 FSM Intrm. 205, 206 (App. 2005).

* * * *

COURT’S OPINION

PER CURIAM:

This election appeal was filed on March 29, 2005. On April 5, 2005, the National Election Director filed a motion to dismiss. No response to the motion has been filed. The time allowed by the single justice’s April 4, 2005 scheduling order to respond to the motion has passed. During the April 7, 2005 telephonic hearing before a single justice, the appellant indicated that he intended to dismiss his appeal. No dismissal, or motion to dismiss has been filed.

The ground for the Director’s motion to dismiss is that the appeal was filed prematurely. This is the same ground, based on essentially the same facts, as the Director’s motion to dismiss Appeal Case No. C2-2005, Wiliander v. National Election Director, [2005] FMSC 44; 13 FSM Intrm. 199 (App. 2005). We granted that motion and dismissed that appeal. We therefore grant the Director’s motion to dismiss this appeal for the same reasons as we dismissed Appeal Case No. C2-2005. Furthermore, this appeal is dismissed on the ground that it has been abandoned.

* * * *