Slider
Slider

|

Slider

IPI ordered to designate a person who can answer questions about its assets and financial situation

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

DISTRICT Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona has ordered Imperial Pacific International LLC to designate a person who has sufficient information to respond to matters relating to the assets and financial situation of the casino developer in the lawsuit of Pacific Rim Land Development, LLC.

Pacific Rim requested the federal court to examine the ability of IPI to pay or to determine the fastest practical manner in which it can pay the unpaid balance of the judgment, and to establish a payment schedule.

According to Colin Thompson, who represents Pacific Rim in the breach of contract lawsuit, IPI failed to designate a witness with knowledge sufficient on the topics covered at the deposition.

“IPI’s designated witness did nothing to prepare for a deposition aside from reviewing certain limited financial documents,”  Thompson said.

This prompted him to file a motion to compel deposition of defendant.

On July 18, the IPI director of finance appeared at the deposition and “testified under oath that she was not prepared to testify in full on behalf of IPI on each of the listed topics,” Thompson said.

The Pacific Rim notice of deposition requires IPI to testify on matters and issues concerning: assets of IPI and assets available for satisfaction of judgment; bank statements for the last 12 months; all financial statements and audited financial statements for the last two years; all papers and records pertaining to debts and any papers of any sort pertaining to business or financial affairs for the period of two years, including  but not limited to any and all certificates of title to vehicles, share certificates, deeds or contracts concerning real estate, or other indications of ownership of real or personal property.

At the hearing on Thursday, Judge Manglona granted the motion of Pacific Rim to compel, and ordered IPI “to identify person or persons with sufficient information to respond.”

Judge Manglona also informed IPI that sanctions will be imposed should the information not be tendered.

The judge likewise granted attorney’s fees and cost for filing of the motion.

IPI, represented by attorney Michael Dotts, was ordered to file a response no later than Aug. 14.

The Pacific Rim motion for aid in judgment was granted in part and denied in part by Judge Manglona on the same day.

She granted the request of Pacific Rim for an order prohibiting IPI from selling or transferring assets.

The judge then directed Thompson to draft an order for court approval.

In addition, she granted the request of the plaintiff to gain access to the casino “cage” subject to the Commonwealth Casino Commission restrictions.

She denied without prejudice the request for an order regarding the removal of the crane.

But Judge Manglona ordered that IPI vehicles be maintained and insured.

The judge at the same time accepted into evidence the plaintiff exhibits without objections and directed the Pacific Rim attorney to submit to the court the list of exhibits and an electronic version of the exhibits.

Judge Manglona scheduled a hearing on the IPI motion to dismiss for Aug. 7 at 1:30 p.m.

The federal court previously  authorized the release to Pacific Rim of IPI funds seized by the U.S. Marshals under a writ of execution from Bank of Saipan in the amount of $1,383,869.45.

Judge Manglona also authorized the release to Pacific Rim of $100 seized from Pacific American Title.

On April 27, the court entered a judgment in favor of Pacific Rim in its lawsuit against IPI for breach of contract and breach of promissory note.

On May 28, the federal court entered 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 sued IPI for refusing to pay $5.65 million for agreed-upon construction work at the IPI casino-resort project.

On July 22, IPI filed an amended counter-claim against Pacific Rim,  but Judge Manglona struck it down on Thursday.

She said IPI did not provide written consent from Pacific Rim nor had it obtained the court permission to amend the counter-claims.

previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow
Slider

Read more articles

Visit our Facebook Page

previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow
Slider