Gange v Government of Guam [2017] GUSC 2 (12 May 2017)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

MARIA A. GANGE, JESUS CRUZ CHARFAUROS,
ANA A. CHARGUALAF, JESUS G. AGUIGUI,
for themselves and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff-Appellants,

v.

GOVERNMENT OF GUAM, GUAM ANCESTRAL LANDS COMMISSION, by and through its individual Commissioners (for injunctive relief) and DOES One (1) through Three Hundred (300), inclusive,

Defendant-Appellees.

Supreme Court Case No.: CVA15-029
Superior Court Case No.: CV1461-10

OPINION

Filed: May 12, 2017

Cite as: 2017 Guam 2

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and submitted on October 25, 2016
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellants: Curtis C. Van de veld, Esq. The Vandeveld Law Offices, P.C. 123 Hernan Cortez Ave. Hagåtña, GU 96910

Appearing for Defendant-Appellees: Kathy A. Fokas, Esq. Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 590 S. Marine Corps Dr. Tamuning, GU 96913

BEFORE: ROBERT J. TORRES, Chief Justice; F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justice; KATHERINE A. MARAMAN, Associate Justice.^[1]

TORRES, C.J.:
[1] Plaintiffs-Appellants Maria Gange, Jesus Cruz Charfauros, Ana A. Chargualaf, and Jesus G. Aguigui (collectively, the “Excluded Beneficiaries”) are Guam Ancestral Land Bank Trust (“Trust”) beneficiaries who succeeded before the Superior Court in enjoining the Commissioners (the “Commissioners”) of the Guam Ancestral Lands Commission (the “Commission”) from transferring two large lots from the Trust corpus as mandated by Guam Public Law 30-158. The Excluded Beneficiaries appeal an order of the Superior Court that concluded the doctrine of sovereign immunity deprives the courts of the subject matter jurisdiction necessary to award attorney’s fees and costs in this action.
[2] At issue is the Superior Court’s application of our recent decision in Bautista v. San Agustin, 2015 Guam 23, to the facts at bar; its determination that the Trust performs a governmental, rather than proprietary, function; and its conclusion that the Guam Legislature (“Legislature”) has not waived sovereign immunity on these facts.
[3]