Castro v G. C. Corporation [2012] GUSC 6; 2012 Guam 06 (4 June 2012)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

BENJAMIN R. CASTRO, JR. dba Pacific Hydronics & Systems,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

G.C. CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellee,

v.

GUAM RESORTS, INC.,
Real Party in Interest-Appellant.

Supreme Court Case No. CVA11-011
Superior Court Case No. CV0236-08

OPINION

Filed: June 4, 2012

Cite as: 2012 Guam 6

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and submitted October 26, 2011
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellee: Thomas McKee Tarpley, Jr., Esq. Thomas McKee Tarpley Law Firm 414 W Soledad Ave., Ste. 904 Hagåtña, GU 96910

Appearing for Real Party in Interest-Appellant: Thomas J. Fisher, Esq. Fisher & Associates Dela Corte Bldg., Ste. 101 167 E Marine Corps Dr. Hagåtña, GU 96910

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

CARBULLIDO, C.J.:

[1] Real Party in Interest-Appellant Guam Resorts, Inc. ("GRI") appeals two orders from the trial court enforcing a writ of execution for garnishment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Benjamin Castro. Castro is a judgment creditor who has yet to receive satisfaction on that judgment from G.C. Corporation ("G.C. Corp."). Castro moved to garnish monies from GRI that GRI allegedly owes to G.C. Corp. through a breach of contract judgment. As a result of improper notice, GRI was not present at the motion hearing regarding the garnishment and freezing of its assets. After the trial court judge signed the order forbidding the transfer of GRI funds owed to G.C. Corp. as well as the order requiring GRI to pay money over to Castro toward satisfaction of the judgment, GRI filed this appeal. As a threshold jurisdictional matter, we conclude that the trial court's orders are properly appealable. We find that the trial court's issuance of the two orders deprived GRI of due process, and we hereby reverse and remand.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

[2]