Camacho v. Estate of Pangelinan

D. Guam

Camacho v. Estate of Pangelinan

1 Guam 406

District Court, D. Guam·Decided July 28, 1970·No. Civil No. 61-A·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

The decision of the lower court is affirmed.

There is adequate support in the record for the Court’s conclusion that the petitioner’s claim was barred by the statute of limitations.

In prosecuting this stale claim, the petitioner has demonstrated the reason for the application of the statute of limitations. The record in the lower court is filled with [407] contentions that are so remote as to time that it is difficult to find them credible. Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

The decision of the lower court is affirmed.

There is adequate support in the record for the Court’s conclusion that the petitioner’s claim was barred by the statute of limitations.

In prosecuting this stale claim, the petitioner has demonstrated the reason for the application of the statute of limitations. The record in the lower court is filled with [407] contentions that are so remote as to time that it is difficult to find them credible. Affirmed.

Camacho v. Estate of Pangelinan, 1 Guam 406 (gud 1970).

Pincite

1 Guam 406 (Camacho v. Estate of Pangelinan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.