Speicher v Speicher [2013] GUSC 11; 2013 Guam 11 (3 July 2013)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

HARRY R. SPEICHER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

VICTORIA L. SPEICHER,
Defendant-Appellee.

Supreme Court Case No. CVA12-033
Superior Court Case No. DM0360-12

OPINION

Filed: July 3, 2013

Cite as: 2013 Guam 11

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and submitted February 21, 2013
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellant: Ron Moroni, Esq. Moroni Law Offices 115 San Ramon St., Ste. 301 Hagåtña, GU 96910

Appearing for Defendant-Appellee: Victoria L. Speicher, pro se HCI Box 5409 Keaau, HI 96749

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

TORRES, J.:

[1] Plaintiff-Appellant Harry Ray Speicher brings this appeal to challenge the dismissal of his complaint for divorce to Defendant-Appellee Victoria Lin Speicher. The trial court dismissed Harry’s case under the doctrine of forum non conveniens because the court deemed Hawai‘i, where Victoria had filed for divorce three months prior, a more appropriate forum. We vacate and remand because the trial court can order the dissolution of the marriage relationship separately from deciding marital property matters.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

[2] Harry and Victoria married in Oregon on February 16, 1985. The Speichers separated in January 2011 and have no children together. Since that time, Harry has been living in Guam and working as a contractor in Guam and the surrounding islands. He obtained a Guam driver’s license and paid income tax to the Government of Guam in 2011 and 2012.

[3] On February 24, 2012, Victoria filed for divorce in Hawai‘i where she and Harry own a home. Harry claims he never received notice that Victoria had filed the divorce action in Hawai‘i.

[4] On May 24, 2012, Harry filed for divorce in Guam citing irreconcilable differences. Victoria was personally served in Hawai‘i on June 12, 2012. Three weeks later, Victoria filed a declaration claiming, inter alia, she does not have minimum contacts with Guam so the court does not have personal jurisdiction; she filed first in Hawai‘i therefore Hawai‘i should have jurisdiction; Guam is an inconvenient forum; and real and personal marriage property is located in Hawai‘i.

[5]