Slider
Slider

|

Slider

Pacific Rim says IPI motion to stay ‘another attempt to delay payment’

Local
Typography
  • Smaller Small Medium Big Bigger
  • Default Helvetica Segoe Georgia Times

PACIFIC Rim Land Development LLC is opposing the motion of Imperial Pacific International to stay execution of judgment pending appeal.

IPI is appealing to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the recent decision and order of District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona who found the casino developer in breach of promissory note with its former contractor, Pacific Rim Land Development LLC.

IPI attorney Michael Dotts told the court that “if the judgment becomes enforceable while the appeal is pending, IPI will be unable to pay, and will likely close permanently.”

The federal court recently issued an amended civil judgment in favor of Pacific Rim in the amount of $6.8 million including the principal amount and attorney’s fees and costs.

Pacific Rim, represented by attorney Colin Thompson, filed a nine-page memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to the IPI motion to stay execution of judgment pending appeal.

“IPI swears that it is broke,” Thompson said.  “It cannot afford to pay Pacific Rim what it owes for materials supplied and services rendered. It cannot afford to keep its lights on and was barely able to make its last payroll.”

But Thompson said IPI’s “financial troubles were not caused by Pacific Rim, other contractors, vendors, or the Covid-19 pandemic. Rather, IPI has a long history of not paying its contractors and vendors.”

He added, “IPI’s motion to stay is yet another attempt to delay payment to Pacific Rim. IPI is not likely to prevail on appeal.”

Because IPI is unable or unwilling to post a “supersedeas” bond, IPI is not entitled to a stay pending appeal, Thompson told the court.

He said the purpose of a supersedeas bond is to protect his client from the risk of a later uncollectible judgment, and compensate Pacific Rim for any loss resulting from the stay of execution.

In place of a bond, IPI submits a proposed lien on leasehold interests owned by IPI, Thompson said.

“There is no guarantee that the leasehold interests presented by IPI will maintain their value. IPI does not represent the leaseholds to be free and clear of encumbrances,” the lawyer said.

Moreover, Thompson said the proposal of IPI is unclear.  It may amount to “a promise to pay something like a bond but not really a bond,” he added.

He said the proposed liens are insufficient and only “guarantee” further litigation.

Further, “the current value of these proposed mortgages are dubious. The risk of IPI’s insolvency and a diminution of the value of the leasehold interests weigh against granting a stay. The uncertainty of the proposal weighs against a stay. The proposed liens do not provide adequate security to Pacific Rim.”

Thompson asked the federal court to rule in favor of Pacific Rim and enforce the judgment.

Recently, Pacific Rim requested the federal court for a writ of execution directing the U.S. Marshals Service to seize money owned or controlled by IPI from  Bank of Saipan, City Trust Bank, Bank of Guam, and First Hawaiian Bank to satisfy the previous court order.

No writ has been issued, but Judge Manglona last week granted the second motion of IPI to shorten the time to hear its motion to stay or suspend the execution of the judgment amounting to $6.8 million.

She scheduled the hearing for June 4, 2020 at 9:30 a.m.

November 2020 pssnewsletter

previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow
Slider

Read more articles

Visit our Facebook Page

previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow
Slider