fr:i "2- . .
1
SUFERICZR 'CGUR"
~=iF@L5£u-Z
'zg2gz Jul. -3 F%¥ e 3~L§="é
' ;.!2
' ?. £Q§Q-3;
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
COURT OF
OF GUAM
GUAM
JUANITA ARCEO3 ARCEO, CIVIL CASE NO.
no. CV0397-20
Plaintiff,
DECISION DECISION AND
AND ORDER
ORDER RE
vs. DEFENDANT'S DEFENDANT'S MOTION
MOTION TO
TO (1)
EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF CULGUAM, CULGUAM,INC.INC.doing doingbusiness
business as
as COST- APPEAL;
APPEAL; (2)
(2) PERMIT
PERMIT CASH
CASH DEPOSIT
U-LESS and JOHNDOE and JOHN DOEINSURANCE INSURANCE
IN IN LIEU
LIEU OF
OF SUPERSEDEAS
SUPERSEDEAS BOND OR
COMPANY COMPANY, EXTEND TIME TIME TO POST BOND; AND
(3) DEFER ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF Defendants. Defendants.
EXECUTION
INTRODUCTION
Defendant CULGuam, CULGuam, Inc.
Inc. doing
doing business
businessasasCost-U-Less
Cost-U-Less("CULGuam")
("CULGuam") moved
moved this
this
Court to (1) extend the the time
timeto
tofile
tile Notice
Notice of Appeal pursuant pursuant totoGRAP
GRAP Rule
Rule 4(a)(5);
4(a)(5); (2)
(2) permit
permit aa
cash deposit deposit in in lieu of a supersedeas
supersedes bond,
bond; or alternatively,
alternatively, extend
extend time
time to
to post
post bond
bond under
GRCP GRCP 6(b), 6(b); and and (3)
(3) defer
defer the
the issuance of the
issuance of the writ
writ of
of execution.
execution. Having
Having reviewed
reviewed CULGuam's
present motion,the present motion, theCourt Courthereby
herebyGRANTS
GRANTSthe
theMotion
Motionto
toExtend
ExtendTime,
Time,GRANTS
GRANTS the Motion
Motion to
Permit Cash Deposit in Lieu Lieu of Supersedeas Bond, and Supersedeas Bond, andGRANTS GRANTS the Motion
Motion to
to Defer
Defer Issuance
Issuance
of ofWrit Writ of ofExecution, Execution,insomuch
insomuch as Defendant
Defendant meets
meetsthe
theCourt's
Court'sdeadline
deadlinetotofile
file the
theNotice
Notice of
Appeal and make the and make the cash cashdeposit
depositin
inlieu
lieuof
of supersedeas
supersedes bond.
CV0397-20 DECISION AND ORDER RERE DEFENDANT'S DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO (1) Page 2 Page
EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL; (2) PERMIT CASH DEPOSIT IN LIEU
LIEU OF
OF SUPERSEDEAS
SUPERSEDEAS BOND OR
OR EXTEND TIME TO
POST BOND; AND (3) DEFER ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF EXECUTION
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A second second jury tn'al trial was held in this case from Hom December 11 to 19,
December 11 19, 2023, at which which time the
jury found Defendant CULGuam to Defendant CULGuam to be negligent, negligent, and
and the Court entered a judgment judgment against
$2,751,170.00. Defendant
CULGuam for $2,75l,170.00. Defendant moved movedfor
for aa third
third trial,
trial, which the court denied on April
23, 2024. See Decision 2024. See Decision and Order Denying Denying Motion for New Trial.
Trial. Defendant
Defendant subsequently
appealed 1) the appealed 1) thejudgment, judgment, 2)
2) the December
December 13,
13, 2023
2023 decision
decision granting
granting aa second
secondjury
jury trial,
trial, and
(3) the later April April 23,
23, 2024
2024 decision
decision denying
denying CULGuam's motion
motion for
for a new trial, docketed as
Court Case No. CVA24-008. See Notice of Supreme Court of Appeal (May 24, 2024). After After judgment
judgment
was entered, several post-judgment post-judgment matters remained pending pending in
in the Superior
Superior Court, including
Plaintiffs Plaintiffs Motion Motionto
to Compel
CompelDiscovery
Discoveryand
andfor
for Leave
Leave to
to Take
Take Depositions
Depositions (Feb.
(Feb. 29,
29, 2024),
Plaintiffs Motion Plaintiffs Motionfor for Leave
Leave to
to Amend
Amendthe
theComplaint
Complaint(Apr.
(Apr. 5,
5, 2024),
2024), and
and Motion
Motion for
for Writ of
of
Execution Execution or, alternatively, to Require Posting of Supersedeas Bond (Dec. 3, 2024). The Motion
to Amend Motion to Compel Amend and Motion Compel were were referred
referred to Magistrate Judge Quam, who scheduled
hearing on September September 16,
16, 2024.
2024. Order
Order Referring
Referring Motions
Motions to
to Magistrate
Magistrate (May 14,
14, 2024).
Magistrate Judge Quam denied both motions and rejected the notion that the Magistrate Judge the omission would
hinder execution of of judgment. See Order Re Re Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Discovery and for
Amend Complaint Leave to Amend Complaintatat77(Jan.
(Jan. 21,
21, 2025).
2025). Magistrate
Magistrate Judge
Judge Quam
Quan also
also ordered sanctions
against CULGuam and its then-trial counsel, Camacho Calvo Law Group LL ("CC Law"), in the
of $95,000. Id.
amount of at pp.
Id at pp. 9-14. In his decision, Magistrate Magistrate Judge Quam made several adverse
findings against CULGuam CULGuam regarding
regarding its
its conduct
conduct during
during trial,
trial, including that Allianz,
CULGuam's insurance CULGuam's insurance company, company, was
was omitted
omitted in bad faith.
in bad faith.
CV0397-20 DECISION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO (1) Page 33 Page
EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL; (2) PERMIT CASH DEPOSIT IN LIEU
LIEU OF
OF SUPERSEDEAS
SUPERSEDEAS BOND
BOND OR
OR EXTEND TIME TO
POST BOND; AND (3) DEFER
DEFER ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF EXECUTION
of these post-judgment
All of post-judgment issues led to the appeal in the Supreme Court of Guam being
times to
stayed multiple times to allow allow time
time for
for the
the Superior
Superior Court
Court to address the issues. See Arceo v.
CULGuam, Inc. CULGuam, Inc. CVA24-008 CVA24-008 Order
Order(Jan.
(Jan. 17,
17, 2025),
2025); Order
Order (Jan.
(Jan. 28, 2025),
2025); Order
Order (Apr. 22,
2025). On March 25, 25, 2025,
2025, the
the Court
Court issued
issuedan
anAmended
Amended Decision
Decision and
and Order
Order granting
granting Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs
Motion for Writ of of Execution,
Execution, and
and requiring
requiring Defendant
Defendant to
to post
postaasupersedeas
supersedes bond in the amount
of the judgment, of plus interest judgment, plus interest and costs, within thirty (30) days to to stay
stay execution
execution pending appeal.
On March 26, 2025, 2025, the
the Amended
Amended Decision and Order was entered into the Court's docket.
Defendant attempted Defendant attempted to to appeal
appeal that Order by filing a Notice of Appeal with the Supreme Court
on April 25, 2025, within the 30-day limit. Notice Notice of Appeal, Apr.
Apr. 25,
25, 2025.
2025. A
A copy
copy was
was served
sewed
on Plaintiff the the same
same day
day via
via email.
email. The
The Supreme
Supreme Court
Court struck of Appeal on stock the Notice of
procedural grounds because it should have been been tiled
filed with
with the
the Clerk ofthe
Clerk of the Superior
Superior Court,
Court, as
GRAP Rule
required by GRAP Rule 3.
3. CVA24-008
CVA24-008 (Order
(Order to
to Strike
Strike (Apr.
(Apr. 30,
30, 2025)). By this point, the 30-
day period under GRAP 4(a)(1)
4(a)(l) had elapsed.
Defendant Defendant filed the the present
present Motion
Motion on
on May
May 6,
6, 2025,
2025, requesting that the Court (1) extend
the time to file Notice of of Appeal pursuant to GRAP Rule 4(a)(5), 4(a)(5); (2) permit a cash deposit in lieu
of a supersedeas supersedes bond, bond;ororalternatively,
alternatively, extend
extend time
time to
to post
post bond
bond under
under GRCP
GRCP 6(b),
6(b); and (3) defer
the issuance of the writ of execution. Plaintiff filed her Opposition on June 3, 3, 2025, and
Defendant Defendant CULGuam CULGuam filed
filed its
its Reply
Reply on
on June
June 17,
17, 2025.
2025. At
At the Status Hearing held on June 26,
2025, the Court informed the parties that that no
no additional
additional argument was
was needed,
needed, and took the matter
under advisement.
CV0397-20 DECISION AND ORDER RERE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO (1) Page4 Page
EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL; (2) PERMIT PERMIT CASH
DEPOSIT IN LIEU
LIEU OF
OF SUPERSEDEAS
SUPERSEDEAS BOND
BOND OR
OR EXTEND TIME TO
POST BOND; AND (3) DEFER
DEFER ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF EXECUTION
DISCUSSION
I. 1. MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL MOTION APPEAL PURSUANT TO
GRAP GRAP RULE
RULE 4(A)(5)
4(A)(5)
Under GRAP Under GRAP Rule Rule 4(a)(1), of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of 4( a)( 1), a notice of of the Superior Superior
entry of
Court within thirty (30) days after entry of the the order
order which
which is being appealed. The Order was
entered by this Court on March 26, 2025, and Defendant attempted to appeal that Order by filing
a Notice of Appeal with the Supreme Court Court on April 25, 2025. Therefore, the Notice of Appeal
was timely, but it was not filed in the correct court. GRAP Rule 4(a)(5) permits this Court to
of Appeal
extend the time to file a Notice of Appeal if:
if: (i) a party so moves no later later than fourteen (14) days
after the time prescribed this Rule 4(a) expires, and (ii) regardless regardless of whether
whether its motion is filed
before or during the thirty (30) days alter the time prescribed prescribed by
by this
this Rule
Rule 4(a)
4(a) expires,
expires, that
that party
shows excusable neglect neglect or
or good
good cause.
cause. Guam Rules
Rules of
of Civil
Civil Procedure Rule 6(b)
6(b) further allows
the Court to to extend
extend time for an act
act with
with aa specified
specified timeline
timeline "on
"on motion made after the time has
if the failure to expired if to act was was the
the result
result of
of excusable
excusable neglect."
neglect." Defendant
Defendant moved
moved for this
extension extension on on May
May 6,
6, 2025, which
which was
was less
less than 14
14 days after April 25, 2025, when when the time to
file Notice of of Appeal was filed. Therefore, the extension extension request
request is timely, and the Court must
whether Defendant
determine whether Defendant has has shown
shown excusable
excusable neglect
neglect or
or good cause.
In In Pioneer Pioneer Inv.
Inv. Serve.
Servs. Co.
Co. v. Brunswick Assocs.
v. Brunswick Ltd P Assocs. Ltd. P 'snN9, theU.S.
'ship, the U.S. Supreme
SupremeCourt
Court held that
"plainly contemplated"
Congress "plainly contemplated" that that courts
courts would
would be
be permitted
permitted to
to accept
accept late filings caused by
"inadvertence, mistake, "inadvertence, mistake, or or carelessness," in addition to circumstances "beyond "beyond the party's
control." 507 U.S. 380, 388 (1993).
(1993). The
The Court goes
goes on to state
state that,
that, "inadvertence, of "inadvertence, ignorance of
the rules, or mistakes construing the rules" typically typically would
would not
not fall
fall Linder "excusable" neglect, under "excusable" neglect,
CV0397-20 DECISION AND ORDER RERE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO (1) Page 5 Page
EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL; (2) PERMIT PERMIT CASH
DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF
OF SUPERSEDEAS
SUPERSEDEAS BOND
BOND OR
OR EXTEND TIME TO
POST BOND;
BOND; AND (3) DEFER ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF EXECUTION
but it is clear that that under
under Rule
Rule 6(b ), the
6(b), the definition
definition is
is "somewhat
"somewhat elastic" and "not limited limited strictly
to circumstances beyond beyond the
the control ofthe
control of the movant."
movant."Id.
Id. atat392
392.
In Pioneer, Pioneer, the Supreme Court Court set out a four factor test test to
to determine
determine whether excusable
neglect exists, which include: (1) the danger of neglect of prejudice to the non-moving party, (2) the length non-moving party,
of delay and its potential impact on judicial of judicial proceedings, (3) the reason for the the delay, including
whether itit was within the reasonable control whether control of of the movant,
movant, and
and (4)
(4) whether
whether the
the moving
movingpalTy's
party's
conduct conduct was in good good faith.
faith. Id. at 395.
395. The
The Guam Supreme Court has adopted these factors,
stating that the Court is is "persuaded
"persuaded by Pioneer and adopt[s] its four-factor test for for determinations
determinations
of 'excusable neglect' under 'excusable neglect' under GRAP GRAP 4(b)(4)."
4(b)(4)." People v.
v. Callahan, 2015 Guam 24 Irl}34.
Guam 24
As discussed above, Defendant Defendant attempted
attempted to
to appeal
appeal this Court's
Court's March
March 25,
25, 2025 Order by
of Appeal with the Supreme Court filing a Notice of Court on on April
April 25,
25, 2025, which the Court has
established was within the 30-day limit. Notice of Appeal, Apr.
Apr. 25,
25, 2025.
2025. A
A copy
copy was
was served
sewed on
Plaintiff the same day via email. The Supreme Court struck the Notice of Appeal on procedural Plaintiff
grounds because it should have been filed with with the
the Clerk
Clerk of
of the
the Superior
Superior Court,
Court, as required by
GRAP Rule 3.
3. CVA24-008
A24-008 (Order
(Order to
to Strike
Strike (Apr. 30,
30, 2025)). By this point, the 30-day period
under GRAP 4(a)(l)
4(a)(l) had elapsed.
The Court now applies these facts to the Pioneer factors. First, this Court does not
believe there believe there is is aa strong danger
danger of
of prejudice to the Plaintiff Plaintiff if
if the Court grants Defendant an
extension extension to file the appeal. As Defendant argued in its Motion, the main purpose of of the notice of
of
appeal is to put the the other party
party on
on notice
notice that
that there
there is
is an
an appeal
appeal from
from the
the judgment.
judgment. Sananap
rap v.
Cyfred, Ltd., Cyfred, lr 18.
10 1]
Ltd, 2008 Guam 10 18.Plaintiff Plaintiffwas
wason
onnotice
notice after
after receiving
receiving service
service of
of the
the Notice
Notice of
Appeal, even even if if the Notice was procedurally deficient.
deficient. While
While Plaintiff
Plaintiffargues
argues that prejudice to the
CV0397-20 DECISION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO (1) Page 6 Page
EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL; (2) PERMIT PERMIT CASH
DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF
OF SUPERSEDEAS
SUPERSEDEAS BOND
BOND OR
OR EXTEND TIME TO
POST BOND; AND (3) DEFER ISSUANCE OF WRIT WRIT OF EXECUTION
Plaintiff is "ongoing" Plaintiff and "has "ongoing" and "has forced forced Plaintiff
Plaintiff to halt enforcement," the fact enforcement," the fact remains that there
are other outstanding motions motions in
in this
this case,
case, as well as an existing outstanding appeal. This case
would not not have been been fully resolved whether whether or
or not
not Plaintiff
Plaintiff had misfiled the Notice of of Appeal,
and therefore it is this this Court's
Court's opinion that granting Defendant an extension would not greatly
For similar
prejudice the Plaintiff. For similar reasons, reasons, the Court of delay and its Court finds that the length of
potential impact on judicial proceedings weigh neutrally, if if not in favor of Defendant. While the
delay has been almost two months at this point, the Defendant moved for permission to re-file
the Notice of Appeal within two weeks of of being notified
notified their
their original filing was flawed.
Furthermore, there are other ongoing Motions in in this case.
The Court finds that the reason for the the delay in this case was within the reasonable
of the Defendant. However, control of However, the Court Court understands that human error exists and does not
believe this error was intentional or made made in bad faith.
faith. Defendant
Defendant immediately
immediately went about
attempting to remedy the mistake mistake with
with the
the present
present Motion,
Motion, and
and admitted
admitted its
its fault
fault in failing to file
with the Superior Court. It has has long
long been
been the preference of
of this Court to make legal
determinations based on the merits of of arguments and not rely solely on punishing procedural
standards. The Defendant Defendant has a right to appeal an Order of this Court.
Court. While
While Defendant did fail
to properly give notice of of that appeal, the Court has discretion to to extend the time to file a notice
for excusable neglect. The Court finds that in this case, sufficiently excusable neglect applies.
Therefore, the Court will grant Defendant's request for an extension.
Defendant's request
An extension extension cannot cannot exceed
exceed thirty
thirty (30)
(30) days after
after the prescribed time for the appeal or ten
(10) days after the date date when
when the order granting the motion motion is
is entered,
entered, whichever
whichever isis later.
later. See
CV0397-20 DECISION AND ORDER RERE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO (1) Page 7 Page
EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL; (2) PERMIT PERMIT CASH
DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF
OF SUPERSEDEAS
SUPERSEDEAS BOND OR
OR EXTEND TIME TO
POST BOND; AND (3) DEFER
DEFER ISSUANCE OF
OF WRIT OF EXECUTION
Guam R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(C). Therefore, the Court grants grants the
the Defendant
Defendant an extension of ten (10)
often
of this Order to properly file a Notice days from the date of Notice of Appeal.
II. 11. MOTION TO PERMIT CASH DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF SUPERSEDEAS BOND;
OR, ALTERNATIVELY, EXTEND TIME ALTERNATIVELY, EXTEND TIME TO POST BOND UNDER UNDER GRCP 6(b)
Under the Local Under Local Rules of the Rules of the Superior
Superior Court
Court of
of Guam
Guam CVR
CVR 65.1.1(e),
65.1.l(e), a party may, in lieu of of
surety in a civil civil case,
case, deposit
deposit the
the judgement amountwith judgment amount withthe
theclerk
clerkofofCourt
Courtas
as long
long as
as that
that party
executes executes an an agreement agreement as
as "required
"required by
by 31
31 U.S.C.
U.S.C. §§ 9303 or any
9303 or any other
other required
required agreement,
agreement,
authorizing the clerk to collect collect or sell the bonds, notes, or certificates of deposit in the event of of
default." The Court agrees that Defendant Defendant has the right to to deposit
deposit the
the judgment
judgment amount in lieu of of
supersedes bond,
the ordered supersedeas bond,however, however,Defendant
Defendanthas
hasso
sofar
far failed
failed to
to place
place such
such a bond or
deposit with the Court, and the 30-day deadline set set by this Court's
Court's March
March 25, 2025 Order is well
past. past. As As such, such, Defendant Defendant has requested
requested an extension of of this time or permission to deposit the
cash with the clerk of Court now.
Under GRCP Under GRCP Rule Rule 6(b)(1)(B),
6(b)(l)(B), the court may, for good cause, extend extend the time
time for
for an act
which must be completed completed within
within aa specified time "on "on motion
motion made
made after
after the time has expired if if
the failure failure to to act
act was
was the
the result
result of
of excusable
excusable neglect."
neglect." As
As shown above, the U.S. Supreme Court
stated in Pioneer that "inadvertence, ignorance of of the rules,
nlles, or mistakes construing the rules"
typically would not not fall under
under "excusable"
"excusable" neglect,
neglect, but
but itit is
is clear
clear that under
under Rule 6(b), the
definition is "somewhat elastic" and "somewhat elastic" and "not "not limited
limited strictly
strictly to circumstances beyond the control of of
Pioneer, 507 U.S. 380 at 392.
the movant." Pioneer, 392. The The Court
Court found
found in
in the
the above
above section
section contemplating
contemplating
an extension for filing of of the Notice of
of Appeal that Defendant's Defendant's failure
failure to
to act
act was the result of
of
CV0397-20 DECISION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO (1) Page 88 Page
EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL; (2) PERMIT PERMIT CASH
DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF
OF SUPERSEDEAS
SUPERSEDEAS BOND
BOND OR
OR EXTEND TIME TO
POST BOND; AND (3) DEFER
DEFER ISSUANCE OF
OF WRIT OF EXECUTION
on this issue, and the above analysis of the Pioneer excusable neglect. The Court finds the same on
factors applies here as well. factors
A supersedes supersedeasbond bondisisgenerally
generallyrequired
requiredunder
underGuam
Guamlaw
lawto
to stay
stay aa judgment
judgment that
that is under
appeal. GRCP Rule_62(d)
Rule.62(d) states
states that
that "[t]he
"[t]he bond
bond may
may be given at or after the time of of filing the
notice of of appeal or of procuring the order allowing the appeal, as as the
the case
case may
may be"
be" (emphasis
of filing the Notice of
added). Due to Defendants' procedural mistake of of Appeal with the Supreme
Court rather than the the Superior Court,
Court, a valid
valid notice
notice of appeal has
has not
not been
been filed with this Court.
The Court recognizes that because the statutory statutory deadline
deadline had passed, the
the Defendant
Defendant could not
refile the notice of retile of appeal appeal without
without permission
permission from
from this
this Court,
Court, and therefore could not not put up the
bond "at or after" the time of of properly filing the notice of of appeal.
appeal. In the analysis above, the Court
granted Defendant permission to Defendant permission to properly properly file
file the appeal
appeal within 10 days
within 10 days of
of this order, therefore
the Defendant is now able to deposit deposit the cash with the clerk of of Court "at or after" the time of of
filing the Notice of of Appeal with the Superior Court of Guam.
Defendant has represented Defendant represented in in its
its Motion
Motion that it is "fully prepared to to secure
secure the
the judgment
judgment and
has set aside aside the the full
full amount
amount for
for immediate
immediate deposit into the Court's registry or approved escrow
Defendant's Motion
account." Defendant's Motionatat p.
p. 15
15 (May
(May 6,
6, 2025). Furthermore, Defendant Defendant has presented to
the Court a declaration "attesting to the availability and sufficiency of of funds to satisfy the full
judgment amount." Id at judgment at p.
p. 16.
16.
The Court grants Defendant permission to place a full cash deposit in lieu of bond, bond, provided
that Defendant that Defendant execute execute aa suitable
suitable bond
bond agreement
agreement as
as contemplated
contemplatedunder
under31
31U.S.C.
U.S.C. §§9303
9303.
on Defendant's Based on Defendant's representations representations that
that itit is
is prepared to deposit
deposit the funds, and the extra time
CV0397-20 DECISION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO (1) Page 9 EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL; (2) PERMIT CASH DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF SUPERSEDEAS BOND OR OR EXTEND TIME TO
POST BOND; AND (3) DEFER ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF EXECUTION
afforded to Defendant to prepare the funds funds during
during the pendency of this Motion with the Court,
Defendant has ten (10) days from the issuance firm the issuance of
ofthis
this Order
Order to
to deposit
deposit the ftmds.
funds.
III. MOTION TO DEFER ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF EXECUTION
The Court GRANTS the Motion to Defer Issuance of of the Writ of Execution, insomuch as
this Court has given permission permission to
to Defendant
Defendant to properly its Notice of Appeal and deposit the
full judgment amount with the Court. If Defendant fails to accomplish these tasks within the ten
(10) days afforded by the Court, the the Writ of Execution
Execution will automatically issue.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS CULGuam's CULGuam's Motions
Motions and
and hereby
hereby allows
allows Defendant
Defendant to properly file
its Notice of Appeal and make a cash deposit with the Court of the full judgment amount in lieu
of of bond. The deadline for Defendant to make the new filing and and deposit the funds is ten (10)
days from the issuance of of this Order. Should Defendant fail to properly file the Notice of Appeal
or make the cash deposit of of $2,751,170.00 with the Court before this deadline, the Writ of
and will
Execution will not be stayed and will automatically be issued.
SO SO ORDERED
ORDERED this
this ~•~;:~·1-t--~g~--~'
Jim , 2025. 2025.
- ;~{;%\--_
I I"-.. _*,;.
- •.
-·
J
H( OHN 1 TERLAJE Judge tor Ccjurt of Guam 'Q c, ,