Abalos v Cyfred, Ltd [2009] GUSC 14; 2009 Guam 14 (27 November 2009)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

GERALDO L. ABALOS and MERIEFE M. ABALOS,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v.

CYFRED, LTD., A GUAM CORPORATION; ENRIQUE BAZA, JR.;
ELEANOR B. PEREZ; DONGBU INSURANCE COMPANY
and DOE DEFENDENTS 1-10,
Defendants-Appellants.

OPINION

Filed: November 27, 2009
Cite as: 2009 Guam 14

Supreme Court Case No.: CVA08-014
Superior Court Case No.: CV0580-02

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and Submitted May 22, 2009
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Plaintiffs-Appellees: Wayson W.S. Wong, Esq. 396 W. O’Brien Drive Hagåtña, GU 96910

Appearing for Defendants-Appellants: Curtis C. Van de Veld, Esq. 123 Hernan Cortes Avenue Hagåtña, GU 96910

BEFORE: ROBERT J. TORRES, Chief Justice; F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justice; KATHERINE A. MARAMAN, Associate Justice.

MARAMAN, J.:

[1] Defendant-Appellant Cyfred, Ltd. ("Cyfred") appeals an award of attorney’s fees and costs to Plaintiffs-Appellees Geraldo and Meriefe Abalos ("the Abaloses"). The Abaloses contend that Cyfred’s appeal is untimely because the Judgment implicitly denied Cyfred’s Motion to Reconsider, and no appeal was taken within thirty days of the Judgment. We agree and therefore dismiss the present appeal as untimely.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

[2] The underlying dispute in this case has already been before this court three times on appeal, and the details are fully described in the prior opinions. See Abalos v. Cyfred, 2006 Guam 7 (Abalos I); Sananap v. Cyfred (Sananap I), 2008 Guam 10; Sananap v. Cyfred (Sananap II), 2008 Guam 19. In short, Cyfred sold plots in the Gill-Baza Subdivision but failed to install sewer lines. Sananap II, 2008 Guam 19 ¶ 2; Abalos I, 2006 Guam7 ¶¶ 1-2. Various owners sued, some asking for rescission of their contracts, others for damages. Sananap II, 2008 Guam 19 ¶ 2-3. The Abaloses were granted rescission of their contract, which was affirmed on appeal. Abalos I, 2006 Guam 7 ¶ 8.

[3] The statute allowing the remedies of rescission or damages, 21 GCA § 60314(f), also allows recovery of attorney’s fees and costs. 21 GCA § 60314(f) (2005). After our decision in Abalos I