Kosrae v Langu [2008] FMSC 62; 16 FSM Intrm. 172 (App. 2008) (13 October 2008)

FSM SUPREME COURT APPELLATE DIVISION

APPEAL CASE NO. K5-2008

STATE OF KOSRAE,
Appellant,

vs.

LIPAR J. LANGU,
Appellee.

__________________________________

ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION

Decided: October 13, 2008

BEFORE:

Hon. Andon L. Amaraich, Chief Justice, FSM Supreme Court
Hon. Martin G. Yinug, Associate Justice, FSM Supreme Court
Hon. Ready E. Johnny, Associate Justice, FSM Supreme Court

APPEARANCE:

For the Appellant: Snyder H. Simon, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Office of the Kosrae Attorney General
P.O. Box 870
Tofol, Kosrae FM 96944

* * * *

HEADNOTES

Appellate Review  Rehearing
A motion to reconsider filed after a panel has disposed of the appeal is considered to be a petition for rehearing. Kosrae v. Langu, [2008] FMSC 62; 16 FSM Intrm. 172, 173 (App. 2008).

Appellate Review  Rehearing
A petition for rehearing can be granted only if the court has overlooked or misapprehended a point of law or fact. Kosrae v. Langu, [2008] FMSC 62; 16 FSM Intrm. 172, 173 (App. 2008).

Appellate Review  Rehearing
When the petitioner has raised no argument that the court has not already considered and rejected, the court will conclude that it has not overlooked or misapprehended a point of law and rehearing will be denied. Kosrae v. Langu, [2008] FMSC 62; 16 FSM Intrm. 172, 173 (App. 2008).

* * * *

COURT'S OPINION

PER CURIAM:

On September 2, 2008, the court dismissed this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. [Kosrae v. Langu, [2008] FMSC 56; 16 FSM Intrm. 83, 88 (App. 2008).] On September 16, 2008, the appellant, State of Kosrae, filed a Motion to Reconsider Order of Dismissal and Response to Motion for Dismissal of Appeal. Kosrae asks the court to permit it to respond to the appellee's motion to dismiss even though the time, as extended, has passed for it to respond because it received the order enlarging time for it to respond after the enlarged deadline; asks the court to consider its arguments on the jurisdiction issue; and asks that the court hold that the statute grants the court jurisdiction over this appeal and thereby reinstate the appeal.

A motion to reconsider filed after a panel has disposed of the appeal is considered to be a petition for rehearing. See Jano v. FSM, [2004] FMSC 52; 12 FSM Intrm. 633, 634 (App. 2004). A petition for rehearing can be granted only if the court has overlooked or misapprehended a point of law or fact. FSM v. Udot Municipality, [2004] FMSC 51; 12 FSM Intrm. 622, 624 (App. 2004). Kosrae contends that the court has misapprehended a point of law concerning jurisdiction. It contends that Kosrae Code section 6.403(3) grants the court jurisdiction over its appeal.

In our September 2, 2008 dismissal order, we considered whether this statute conferred jurisdiction upon us for this appeal. We determined that it did not.

When the petitioner has raised no argument that the court has not already considered and rejected, the court will conclude that it has not overlooked or misapprehended a point of law and rehearing will be denied. Goya v. Ramp, [2006] FMSC 42; 14 FSM Intrm. 305, 308 (App. 2006). Accordingly, although Kosrae's tardy receipt of the order enlarging time is disturbing, the State of Kosrae's motion for reconsideration or petition for rehearing is denied.

* * * *