go L E Q
34J5?E§R§{)R CGUR8'
QF QUAM
2325 %é9V 23 FH *gt
v'"'L"'"O" QLQRM o= co11er
F?
En·?\ f C8§$§T
I.In
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
COURT OF
OF GUAM
GUAM
GUAM GUAM HOUSING AND AND URBAN URBAN CIVIL CIVIL CASE
CASE NO. CV0692-24
RENEWAL AL AUTHORITY, AUTHORITY,AAPublic
Public Body
Body
Corporate and andPolitic,
Politic,
Plaintiff, DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING GRANTING
vs. MOTION MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
169,795 169,795 ± dzSquare SquareMeters
Metersofof Land in the
Municipality Municipality ofof Mangilao, Mangilao,HONG
HONGYI YITIAN,
TIAN,
INC., INC., aa Guam Guam Corporation, DR. JOEL JOSEPH, and JOSEPH, andUNKNOWN UNKNOWN OWNERS,OWNERS,
Defendants.
Defendants Dr.
Dr. Joel
Joel Joseph
Josephand
andHong
HongYi
YiTian,
Than,Inc.
Inc.(HYT)
(HYT) challenge
challenge the taking
taking of their
properties by Plaintiff properties by Plaintiff Guam GuamHousing
Housingand
andUrban
Urban Renewal
Renewal Authority
Authority (GHURA). GHURA (GHURA). GHURA
contends that that Guam Guamlaw
law grants
grantsititthe
theauthority
authorityto
tocondemn
condemnDefendants'
Defendants' properties for a hospital
project, despite despite there being no concurrent plans to concurrent plans to build housing housing units.
units. The Court
Court finds
finds that
that
GHURA's GHURA'scondemnation condemnationofofthe theproperties
propertiesexceeds
exceedsits
itsstatutory
statutory authority,
authority, and
and therefore,
summary judgmentisiswarranted summary judgment warrantedininDefendants'
Defendants'favor.
favor.
I. UNDISPUTED FACTS
The Court finds the following followingfacts
factstotobe
beundisputed
undisputed based
based on
on the pleadings, declarations,
and the the record:
record:
1. 1. Dr.
Dr.Joseph
Josephclaims
claims aa fee
fee simple
simple interest
interest in
in Lots
Lots 5328-REM-R2
5328-REM-R2 and
and 5328-REM-2 in
Mangilao. Mangilao. Comal.
Compl.115
,i 5 (Dec.
(Dec. 18,
18, 2024),
2024); Decl.
Deel. Dr.
Dr. Joel
Joel Joseph1]2
Joseph ,i 2 (July
(July 10,
10, 2025).
ORIGINAL ORIGENAL
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER ORDER GRANTING MOTION
MOTION FOR SUMMARY Page Page2
JUDGMENT
HYThas
2. HYT hasaafee feesimple
simpleinterest
interestininLots
Lots5327-4-R5,
5327-4-R5, 5327-4-2,
5327-4-2, 5327-4-3,
5327-4-3, 5327-4-4,
5327-4-4, and
5327-4-5 in Mangilao. Compl.
Mangilao. Con ~ 5; Answer pl. 115, Answer ofHYT ~ 2 (Jan.
ofHYT1]2 (Jan. 14,
14, 2025).
GHURA'sBoard
3. GHURA's Boardadopted adoptedResolution
ResolutionNo.
No.FY2025-009,
FY2025-009, approving
approving the proposed
condemnation condemnation of
of Dr.
Dr. Joseph and HYT's
HYT's properties.
properties. Decl.
Deel.Elizabeth
ElizabethF.F.Napoli,
Napoli,EX.
Ex. 11
7, 2025).11
(Aug. 7,
4. The Theresolution
resolutionindicates
indicatesthat
that GHURA
GHURAwas
wasoffered
offeredaaloan
loan "for
"for the
the acquisition
acquisition of
of real
property for the
the development
development of
of healthcare facilities, and related related community
community
development projects" in
in Mangilao.
Mangilao. Id. at 1.
Id at 1.
5. 5. The Theresolution
resolutioncites
cites12
12GCA
GCA§§5104(m)
5104(m)as
as its
its authority
authority to
to condemn
condemn private
private property
property
in "connection with any project under 12 GCA Chapter 5." Id "connection with Id.
6. GHURA's GHURA'sresolution
resolutionfurther
furtherdeclares
declares GHURA
GHURAwas
wascreated
created "to
"to promote
promote the health,
safety and welfare
welfare of its
its people
people by
by proper
proper planning
planning of
of community
community development"
development" and
condemnation is
that the condemnation is "for "for the benefit
benefit of
of the public generally or or any substantial
substantial
segment thereof." at 1, thereof." Id. at 1, 4.
7. GHURA's GHURA'sresolution
resolutiondoes
doesnot
notdiscuss
discussany
anyspecific
specifichousing
housingplan,
plan,though
thoughitit states
states that
"opportunities for new infrastructure, economic economic development,
development, and
and future
future attainable
housing developments would further benefit the the community."
community." Id
Id. atat2,2; see
see also
also Deck.
Deel.
George B. Castro, EX. A at Ex. A at 19:1-14
19: 1-14(Napoli
(Napolitestifying
testifyingthat
thathousing
housing developments
developments
not part of the plans).
were possible, though not
8. The TheMedical
MedicalCampus
CampusMaster
MasterPlan,
Plan, which
whichthe
theresolution
resolution calls
calls "an
"an objective
objective basis
basis for
its action," does not reference a housing project. Decl.
Deel. Elizabeth
Elizabeth F.
F. Napoli,
Napoli, Ex. 11 at
11 A A legible legible copy copy of the
the resolution
resolution is
is attached
attached to
to the
the deposition
deposition transcript
transcript of
ofGHURA's
GHURA's Executive
Director, Elizabeth F. Napoli. See See Decl.
Deel. George
GeorgeB. B.Castro,
Castro,Ex.
Ex. A,
A,EX.
Ex. 11 (July 10,
10, 2025).
ORIGINAL
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER ORDER GRANTING MOTION
MOTION FOR
FOR SUMMARY Page 3 Page
JUDGMENT
1; Ex. 2. 1, 2. GHURA
GHURA also
also did
did not
not add
add any
any low-income
low-income housing components to the
Campus Master
Medical Campus Master Plan. Deal.
Deel. George
GeorgeB.
B.Castro,
Castro, Ex.
Ex. A
A at
at 18:22-25,
18:22-25, 19:16-18.
19:16-18.
GHURAhas
9. GHURA hasnot notmade
madeany
anydetermination
determinationthat
that either
either Defendant's
Defendant's properties
properties were
blighted. Id. atat 27:7-2819.
slums or blighted. 27:7-28:9. Additionally, Additionally, GHURA
GHURA determined
determined that
that because
because
the properties were uninhabited,2 uninhabited,2 itit could
could not pursue an
an "urban
"urban renewal"
renewal" project.
Hr'g at Hr'g at 9:30-32,
9:30-32; Deal.
Deel. Vance
Vance L. Reklai, SRA,
L. Reldai, SRA, Exs.
Exs. 1-5
1-5 (Aug.
(Aug. 7,
7, 2025) (appraisals
(appraisals
indicate vacant
vacant lots),
lots); Decl.
Deel. Sis S. Hutapea,
Siska S. Hutapea, Exs.
Exs. 1-2
1-2 (Aug. 7, 2025) (same).
10. GHURA is in the design phase of the hospital's hospital's infrastructure. Hr'g 9:52-53. 3 Hr'gatat 9:52-53.3
11. are determined to be unsuitable for a hospital or housing 11. In the event the properties are
project, GHURA intends
intends to sell the properties properties back to the original owners owners or
or relist
sale. Id.
them for sale. Id at
at 9:51.
II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 11.
GHURA filed filed this action to finalize finalize the
the exercise
exercise of eminent domain and adjudicate the
payment payment of See Con of just compensation to Defendants. See Comppl.1. ItItrequested requestedthat
that the
the Court
Court allow
allow itit to
$6,653,000.00 as deposit $6,653,000.00 as just just compensation
compensation for
for the
the properties.
properties. The Court permitted Defendants
to lodge obi sectionstotothe objections thedeposit, deposit,which
whichneither
neitherdid.
did. Hr'g
Hr'g (Feb.
(Feb. 12,
12, 2025).
2025). The Court therefore
ordered the deposit of of the funds, which remain on deposit deposit to date. Order
Order for
for Deposit
Deposit (Mar.
(Mar. 4,
GHURA claims 2025). GHURA claims the the deposit
deposit effectuated
effectuated the transfer oftitle title to
to itself.
itself. GHURA's Resp. to
GHURA's Resp.
Def. Dr. Joel Joseph's Joseph's Stmt.
Stmt. Undisputed
Undisputed Facts
Facts at
at 22 (Aug.
(Aug. 7,
7, 2025),
2025); Hr'g
Hr'g at
at 9:45
9:45 (Sept.
(Sept. 4, 2025).
22 Although Although the the lots
lots are
are vacant,
vacant, both
both Defendants
Defendants claim
claim to
to have
have development
development plans for their respective properties. Decl.
Deel. Dr. ,r (investments Dr. Joel Joseph113 (investments made made for
for crematory
crematory and veterinary
services), Hr'g at services); Hr'g at 10:09 10:09 (Sept. 4, 2025) (HYT plans to build 64 housing units).
33 GHURA's GHURA's counsel represents that GHURA GHURA has rezoned
rezoned the lots
lots to
to aa public
publicuse zone. Id.
usezone. Id
ORIGINAL omen
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY Page4 Page
JUDGMENT
The Court then then allowed
allowed limited
limited discovery regarding GHURA's GHURA's authority
authority to
to condemn
condemn the
properties. properties. Upon Upon the
the conclusion
conclusion of
ofthe
the limited
limited discovery
discoveryperiod,
period,Dr.
Dr.Joseph
Joseph moved
moved for
for summary
summary
judgment, arguing judgment, arguingthat thatGHURA
GHURAhad
hadexceeded
exceededits
itslegal
legalauthority.
authority. Memo.
Memo. P.
P. &
& A. in
in Support of
of
Def. Dr. Joel Joseph'sMot.
Joel Joseph's Mot. Summ.
Summ.J.J.(July
(July10,
10, 2025).HYT
2025). HYTjoined
joinedininthe
themotion.
motion.Def.
Def.HYT's
HYT's
Joiner Joinder (Aug.
(Aug. 20, 20, 2025).
2025). GHURA
GHURA opposed it, reasserting its alleged opposed it, alleged statutory statutory authority to
condemn the theproperties.
properties. Memo. Opp'n
Opp'n (Aug.
(Aug. 7,
7, 2025).
2025). The
TheCourt
Courtheard
heardthe
the parties'
parties' arguments
arguments
on on September 4, 2025, and took took the
the motion under advisement.
III. 111. AND DISCUSSION LAW AND
Dr. Joseph and andHYT
HYT contend
contend they are
are entitled
entitled to
to summaly
summary judgment in
in these
condemnation proceedings proceedings because
becauseGHURA
GHURA exercised its eminent domain powers Powers ultra
ultravires,
fires,
that is, beyond its that is, its authority.
authority. In
In evaluating the parties' arguments, reviews whether the arguments, the Court reviews
pleadings, affidavits, affidavits, and
and discovery
discovery record
recordshow
showthat
that there
there is
is no
no genuine
genuine issue
issue as
as to any material
Guam R.
fact. Guam R. Civ.
Civ.P.P.56.
56.As
Asthe
themoving
movingparty, Dr.Joseph
party,Dr. Josephhas
hasthe
theinitial
initialburden
burden to
to show
show that
that
undisputed factsin undisputed facts inthe therecord
recordsupport
supportaaprima
primafacie
facieentitlement
entitlementtotorelief.
relief. Cho
Cho v.
v. Alupang
Alupang Beach
Beach
Club, Inc., 2025 Guam Club, Inc., Guam 33,i'H28.
28.However,
However,to
to defeat
defeat the
the motion,
motion, non-movant
non-movant GHURA
GHURA must
must
produce at least least some
some significant
significant probative evidence evidence tending
tending to
to support
support its position
position as
as pled in
in the
complaint. Id. complaint. Id.
A. The Thescope
scope of
of GHURA's
GHURA'scondemnation
condemnationPowers
powersand
and its
its purposes.
purposes.
GHURA GHURAargues argues that
that 12 GCA §§5104(m)
12 GCA 5104(m) provides providesititaageneral
general power
powerto
to condemn
condemn property
property
for for aa prob actaligned project alignedwith withits
itspurposes.
purposes.Memo.
Memo.Opp'n
Opp'n at 6.
6. That
That statute states that
statute states thatGHURA GHURA may
condemn private private property property which
which itit "may
"may deem necessary
necessary for
for or in connection with with any
anyproject"
project"
performed performed under the the statute
statuteas
aslong
longas
asitit"first
"first adopt[s] aa resolution resolution finding
finding and
and declaring
declaring that
that the
acquisition of such acquisition of suchproperty propertyisisnecessary
necessaryfor
forsuch
such purposes."1212GCA
purposes." GCA§§5104(m).
5104(m).GHURA
GHURA
oRiGINAL ORIGINAL i*
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER ORDER GRANTING MOTION
MOTION FOR
FOR SUMMARY
SUMMARY Page 5 Page
JUDGMENT
further cites section 5104(y), which allows allows it to "can'y
"carry out
out housing
housing ...
...prob
projects,
acts, and in
connection therewith connection therewith plan, plan, prepare, develop, construct, acquire, lease and dispose of of any such
prob actswithin projects withinthe thecontemplation
contemplationof'
of"GHURA's
GHURA'senabling
enablinglaw.
law. 12
12 GCA
GCA §§ 5104(y).
5104(y). From
From these
these
Court derives
provisions, the Court derives that that GHURA
GHURA must
mustestablish
establishthat:
that:(1)
(1)ititisisininpursuit
pursuitofofaa"prob
"project"
act"
as defined under Guam law, and (2) the the project
project lies
lies within
within the confines of
the confines of GHURA's
GHURA's purpose.
Definition of 1. Definition of "Project"
"Project"
Defining Defining the term "project,"
the term "project," 12 GCA §§ 5102(a)(l 12 GCA 5102(a)(13) could could not
not be
be clearer:
clearer: "[p
"[p]roject
4
means a housing project."4 "housing project,"
In defining "housing project," the the law
law reiterates the emphasis on
housing: "any "anywork
workororundertaking
undertakingororactivity
activity to
to provide
providedecent,
decent,safe
safeand
and sanitary
sanitary urban
urban or
or rural
dwellings, dwellings, apartments, and other apartments, and other living living accommodations
accommodations for
for families
families oflow
of low income."
income." 12
12 GCA
GCA §§
5102(a)(l 1). The definition of 5102(a)(11). of "housing project" continues:
(A) Such work, undertaking or activity may include buildings, land, equipment, equipment, facilities, facilities, other real or personal property for necessary, necessary, convenient
convenient
or desirable appurtenances, streets, sewers and other other sanitary facilities and services, water supply, utilities, parks, site preparation, landscaping and administrative, community, community, health, recreational, welfare and similar facilities and services.
(B) The term also extends to the planning of of buildings and improvements, improvements, the acquisition acquisition of
of properly,
property, the demolition
demolition of
ofexisting
existing structures,
structures,
the clearance of of slum areas, the construction, reconstruction, reconstruction, alteration or repair of of the improvements, and all other work in connection connection therewith,
therewith, as
as well as to
all other real or personal personal property
property and
and tangible
tangible or intangible assets held or used in connection connection with the housing prob et.
project.
12 12 GCA GCA §§ 5102(a)(11).
§§ 5102(a)(l 1). In justifying the In justifying the condemnation condemnation of land for
ofland for aa hospital,
hospital, GHURA
GHURA
concentrates on the portion of the the definition
definition that
that mentions
mentions health facilities facilities and
and services.
services. 12 GCA
§§ 5102(a)(11)(A).
5102(a)(l l)(A).
44 A A "project" defined as "project" is also defined as an "urban "urban renewal"
renewal"prob
project,
act, but
but GHURA
GHURA concedes
concedes it is not
pursuing an urban urban renewal
renewal project.
project. Memo. Opp'n
Opp'n at
at 55 n.3.
ORIGINAL oR1@l e~ L
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY Page Page 6
JUDGMENT
GHURA'sExplicit 2. GHURA's Explicit Purposes Purposes
Article Article 11 of ofTitle
Title12,
12,Chapter
Chapter 5,
5, contains extensive discussion contains an extensive discussionof of GHURA's
GHURA's purpose.
purpose.
Setting forth GHURA's GHURA's priorities,
priorities, the
the Legislature's
Legislature's "Declaration "Declaration of
ofFindings
Findings and Policy" focuses and Policy" focuses
on housing, and more housing, and more specifically, specifically, eliminating eliminating slum
slum and
and blighted
blighted areas and providing areas and providing housing housing for
low-income low-income families.
families. 12
12GCA
GCA§ §5101.
5101.First,
First,the
theLegislature
Legislatureechoes
echoesnational
nationalconcerns
concerns about
about
public welfare welfare and and economic health
health and thenstates:
and then states: "There
"There exist
existin
inGuam
Guam slum
slum and blighted
areas, areas, as well as as substandard andinadequate substandard and inadequatehousing housingconditions
conditionsand
andaaserious
seriousshortage
shortageof
of safe,
sanitary anddecent sanitary and decentdwelling dwelling accommodations
accommodationsat
atrentals
rentalsororprices
priceswhich
whichfamilies
familiesof
of low
low income
can afford to can afford to pay."
pay." 12
12 GCA
GCA§§
§§5101(a),
510l(a),(b).
(b)."These slum
"These andblight
slumand blightconditions, conditions,and
and the
the
continuing shortage shortage of
of decent housing
housingfor
for low-income families
families present
present problems of immediate
and long-rangegovernmental and long-range governmental concern concern ......"
" 12 GCA §§
12 GCA §§ 5101(c).
5101(c).
Next, Next, the the law
lawreinforces
reinforcesthe
theintent
intentto
to address
address slum
slum and blighted conditions and to provide and to provide
housing housing for low-income low-income populations:
populations:
The elimination
elimination and
and prevention
prevention of ofslums
slums and
and blighted
blighted areas,
areas, the planning,
undertaking undertaking andandcarrying canoing out of urban renewal renewal projects and thethe provision provision
of ofsafe,
safe, sanitary,
sanitary, and decent
decenthousing
housingforfor low-income
low-income families inin Guam, Guam,
and during
during periods of acute need for disaster victims victims and
and persons engaged
in in national defense activities, activities, constitute
constitutepublic
publicuses
uses and
and public purposes,
purposes,
not competitive with private enterprise, competitive with private enterprise, are are proper governmental functions, functions, devoted to the health, health, welfare
welfare and safety of the people of and safety ofGuam, Guam,
and that
that the
thepowers
Powers conferred
conferred by this Chapter are for public uses and for public uses and
purposes for which
which public money may may bebe expended expended and private property may be acquired,
acquired, by eminent domain or otherwise.
12 GCA §§ 55101(f). 12 GCA lol(f). Finally, Finally,the
theDeclaration
Declarationprovision
provisionadopts
adopts the "national policy"
the "national policy" of"the of "the
elimination elimination of ofslum
slum and blight conditions, by the orderly redevelopment and renewal renewal of
of
communities, by proper planning communities, by planning of of community
community development and andby
byprovision
provision of safety, decent
and sanitarydwellings and sanitary dwellingsforforlow-income low-income families
families ...."
.... " 12 GCA §§ 5101(g).
12 GCA 5101(g).
oRe@
I
I
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY Page 7 JUDGMENT
Notably, GHURA admits that this condemnation has nothing to do with slum and
blighted housing areas or conditions. Memo.
Memo. Opp'n
Opp'natat55n.3
n.3.
B. GHURA GHURA does
doesnot
nothave
haveexpress
express Powers
powers to condemn property for a hospital condemn property
project if unconnected project if unconnected to housing.
Having defined necessary terms and explored GHURA's GHURA's purpose,
purpose, the
the Court
Court now
now turns
turns to
whether GHURA has properly properly exercised
exercised eminent
eminent domain.
domain. When
When aa sovereign exercises eminent
domain itself, it has has "inherent,
"inherent, necessary,
necessary, and
and sweepingly
sweepingly broad" power. Gov of Guam v.
Gov't of
I6240 2011 Guam 17 ,r'll 15. 16240 Square Meters of Land, 2011 15. But But when
when aa legislature
legislature delegates
delegates eminent
domain domain Powers powers to a government government agency, the agency's agency'sPowers
powers to
to take
take private
private properly
property are
are not as
generous. For For delegated
delegated eminent
eminent domain
domainauthority,
authority, the
the taking
taking must
must be
be consistent
consistent with the
purposes of the legislation and strictly construed in favor of the property owner and against the
agency. agency. See, e.g.,Dattco, Inc.
See, e.g., Inc. v.
v. Comm 'r ofTransp.,
Transp., 151 A.2d 823,
823,826 (Conn. 2016),Skreden (Conn. 2016); Skreden
v. Super. Cr., 126 Cal.
Super. Ct., Cal. Rptr. 411,413 413 (Ct.
(Ct. App. 1975),
1975); city
City of
ofBirmingham
Birmingham v.
v. Brown,
Brown, 22 So.2d
So.2d
305, 308 (Ala.
(Ala. 1941 1941).
). In Guam, when
when strictly
strictly interpreting a statute, the the Court
Court must
must "determine
"determine
whether the language is 'plain and unambiguous'
unambiguous' by
by reference
reference to
to 'the
'the language
language itself,
itself, the specific
context in which that language is is used, and the broader
broader context
context of
of the statute whole. 739 statute as a whole."'
Earrett-Anderson Barrett-Anderson v. Camacho, ,r 23 (quoting Camacho, 2015 Guam 20 1123 (quoting Robinson v.
v. Shell
Shell Oil
Oil Co., 519 U.S.
337, 337,340 (1997>).
(1997)).
Stated another way, the the scope
scope of
of the
the delegated
delegated power
power of eminent domain "is "is not to be
inferred from vague and doubtful general general phrases"
phrases" and
and instead
instead must
must be
be express
express or,
or, at
at least,
necessarily implied.55 Providence & Worcester necessarily implied. R.R. Co.
Worcester R.R. Co. v.v.Energy EnergyFacilities
Facilities Siting
Siring Bd,
Ba, 899
55 GHURA GHURA focuses on its alleged express authority and offers no arguments that it possesses authority. Even
necessarily implied authority. Even ifif itit did, the Court would arrive arrive at
at the
the same
same conclusion.
conclusion. To
be necessarily implied, eminent eminent domain
domain Powerspowers must
must relate
relate to
to the anticipated
anticipated use of
of the
ORIGINAL
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION MOTION FOR SUMMARY Page 88 Page
JUDGMENT
N.E.2d th N LLC, N.E.2d 829, 829, 835 (Mass.
(Mass. 2009);
2009), Cent. Puget Sound
Cent. Puget SoundReg'l
Reg'l Transit
Transiz'Auth.
Auth. v.v. WR-SRI
WR-SRI120
120"'N LLC,
422 P.3d 891, (Wash. 2018)
891, 899 (Wash. 2018) (en bane);
bane),Skreden,
Skreden, 126 Cal. Rptr. at 413;
413, City
City of
ofBirmingham,
2 So.2d at 308 308 ("A
("A grant
grant of
of the
thepower
power of
ofeminent
eminent domain
domain ...
... isis limited
limited to
to die
the express
express terms or
clear implication of the statute statute in
in which
which the
the grant
grant is
is contained.").
contained."). This means that the delegated
eminent eminent domain domain authority authority must
must be
be exercised
exercised only
only for
for the purposes the Legislature has provided,
and not beyond.
In explaining how a housing agency can condemn condemn land
land for
for a hospital, GHURA zeroes in
on how the definition of "housing "housing project"
project" law
law includes
includes "health
"health ... facilities and ... facilities and services."
services." 12
GCA §§ 55102(a)(l GCA l02(a)(11)(A).
l)(A). But
But those
those terms
terms may not be
may not be viewed
viewed in
in isolation
isolation and
and must
must rather be
rather be
examined within the full context of of GHURA's
GHURA's Powers. ,r 23 powers. Barrett-Anderson, 2015 Guam 20 ii
("in expounding expounding aa statute, we we must not be guided by a single sentence or member of of a sentence,
but look to the provisions of the whole law, and to its object and policy").
Guam law permits GHURA to develop a "housing "housing project," but when defining that term,
first and
the Legislature first and foremost foremost explained
explained it meant
meant "dwellings, apartments, and other living
accommodations accommodations for families oflow for families of low income."
income." 12
12 GCA
GCA §§ 5102(a)(11).
5102(a)(l 1). The
The law
law mentions
mentions the
the
inclusion of facilities-"water supply, of other facilities-"water supply,utilities, utilities,parks,
parks, site
site preparation,
preparation, landscaping and
administrative, community, health, administrative, community, health, recreational, recreational,welfare
welfareand
andsimilar
similarfacilities
facilitiesand
andservices"-but
services"-but
when read in full, the law incorporates those appurtenances as part of of the
the work
work aimed to
to provide
provide
decent, safe and decent, safe and sanitary sanitary housing
housing facilities.
facilities. 12
12 GCA
GCA §§ 5102(a)(l
5l02(a)(11)(A).
l)(A). In
In other
other words,
words, as
as
condemned condemned property. See Dep Dep 't ofTransp.
Transp. v.v. Stapleton,
Stapleton, 97 P.3d 938, 942 (Colo. 2004) (en bane)
(must be a "sufficiently direct functional relationship"), Ariz. Foothills functional relationship"); Foothills Unu'iea'
Unified Sch.
Sch. Dist.
Dist. No. IN18
v. v. La Paloma Prop. Owners Ass'n, 'n, 363 P.3d 127, 131 (Ariz. App.
App. 2015) ("There can be no implication implication unless unless itit arises from a necessity so absolute that, without without it,
it, the grant itself will be defeated."). As As discussed
discussed herein,
herein, because
because there
there is is no housing prob et in the works, GHURA project
exceeded its exceeded its authority authority by by condemning condemning land for non-housing purposes.
ORIGINAL
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER ORDER GRANTING MOTION
MOTION FOR SUMMARY Page 9 JUDGMENT
defined, a housing housing project
project must
must involve
involvehousing.
housing. Accordingly,
Accordingly, GHURA's
GHURA's eminent domain
power power must must be exercised in connection connection with
with aa housing
housing project,
project, rather
rather than stand-alone facilities
unrelated to a housing project.
This interpretation of of GHURA's powers reflects the Legislature's Declaration of GHURA's Powers of
GHURA's GHURA's purpose.
purpose. See See 12
12 GCA
GCA §§ 5101.
5101. As
Asnoted
notedabove,
above,GHURA
GHURAstates
states that
that itit did
did not
not
condemn Dr. condemn or HYT's Dr. Joseph's or HYT's properties properties in
in order
order to
to eliminate
eliminate slums
slums or
or blighted
blighted areas,
areas, nor in
pursuit of any any urban
urban renewal
renewal project;
project, rather,
rather, ititclaims
claims totohave
havebroad
broadcommunity
community development
development
powers. However, Powers. However, the the elimination
eliminationand
andrehabilitation
rehabilitation of
ofslums
slums and
and blighted
blighted areas
areas are
are the specific
purposes prescribed for for GHURA
GHUR.Aby
bythe Legislature. Id.
theLegislature. Id. With the elimination of of slums and
blighted areas, areas, GHURA GHURA is
is then
then tasked
tasked with
with supplying
supplying homes
homes for
for low-income
low-income households.
households. 12
GCA GCA §§ §§ 5101(a), 510l(a), (b), (c), (f), (g) (all discussing housing needs).
(b), (c),
The undisputed facts of this case case show
show that there
there was
was no
no housing project
prob et underway
underway when
GHURA resolved GHURA resolved to take Dr.
Dr. Joseph's
Joseph's and
and HYT's
HYT's private property. GHURA had property. GHURA had the burden to
demonstrate that it adhered to its purposes and its authority, but failed failed to
to provide
provide the Court with
evidence that evidence that building housing (let alone housing for low-income households)
households) formed
formed part
part of
of its
objective in condemning Dr. Joseph and HYT's HYT's properties. At most, GHURA properties. At GHURA considered considered larger
infrastructure projects projects capable
capable of servicing the hospital, and perhaps later, a housing
Butwhen
development. But whenreviewing reviewingGHURA's
GHURA'sPowers
powersininthe
theentire
entirecontext
contextof
ofits
its enabling
enabling statute,
statute,
the Court finds finds the
the express
express confines
confines of
of GHURA's
GHURA's condemnation of
of land to
to developing housing
support of
and other buildings in support of that thathousing-not appurtenances first housing-not appurtenances first and and then potentially
housing in in the future to accompany the other facilities.
Moreover, even even if
if it can be argued that there there is
is aa question
question of
of whether
whether GHURA can
condemn property condemn property for for a health facility without also having a plan to build housing, those doubts
ORIGi'\¥ ORIGINAL
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY 10 Page 10
JUDGMENT
must be construed against GHURA. "Any "Anyfair,
fair, reasonable
reasonable and
and substantial
substantial doubt
doubt about the
existence of municipal corporation of a power in a municipal corporation must must be
be resolved
resolved against it."
it." City of
of Little Rock
v. Raines, v. 486,491 Raines, 411 S.W.2d 486, 491 (Ark. 1967) (city acted ultra vires virus in
in taking
taking property).
property). Instead,
the Court must strictly strictly interpret
interpret eminent
eminent domain statutes in favor of private private landholders,
landholders, given
that takings are are in derogation of
of private property rights. Area Water Water Auth. v. Schuylkill River
Greenway Ass 'n, 100 A.3d 572, 579 (Pa.
(Pa. 2014)
2014) (strictly
(strictly construing statutes to to find
find agency
exceeded exceeded its condemnation condemnation authority),
authority); Dattco, Inc., 151 co, Inc., 151 A.2d at 826 (same);
(same), City of
ofLittle Rock,
411 S.W.2d at 491.
491. "When
"When the
the state
state elects to take private property property without
without the
the owner's
owner's consent,
simple justice requires that the state state proceed with due concern concern for the venerable rights it is
preempting." Norwood v. preempting." v. Horney, Horney, 853 N.E.2d 1115, 1128-29, 1137-38 (Ohio 2006) (reviewing
fundamental right).
the right to property as a fundamental
In summary, in reviewing reviewing GHURA's
GHURA's condemnation
condemnationrights
rights under
under section
section 5104(m) and the
full context of what projects GHURA may pursue GHURA may pursue under
under Title
Title 12,
12, Chapter
Chapter 5, Article 11 of
of the
Guam Code Annotated, the Court finds GHURA is developing developing aa project
project outside of
of its defined
authority and authority and beyond its purposes. even if purposes. Also, even if there are doubts as to to whether
whether GHURA is
acting within its authority, authority, the
the Court
Court must
must conclude
conclude in
in favor
favor of
of the
the landowners
landowners and
and determine
that GHURA lacks the claimed Powers.
powers. Having
Having found
found that
that GHURA
GHURAisisacting
acting ultra
ultra virus,
vires, the
Court determines that GHURA GHURA cannot
cannot condemn
condemnprivate
private property
property for
for the
the hospital
hospital prob et.
project.
C. GHURA's GHURA'sventures
venturesinto
intocommunity
communitydevelopment
developmentprojects
projects are
are not relevant.
final point,
As a final point, the the Court
Court addresses
addresses GHURA's
GHURA's arguments
arguments that
that its
its usual business includes
community community development developmentprojects
projects such
such as
as medical
medical clinics.
clinics. Decl.
Deel.Elizabeth
ElizabethF.F. Napoli
Napoli114,
14; Hr'g at
9:41. Likewise, Likewise, in in its
its resolution,
resolution, GHURA
GHURA implied
implied that
that itit has
has broad powers
Powers to
to implement
implement
community development development projects.
projects. Decl.
Deel. Elizabeth
Elizabeth F.
F. Napoli, Ex. 1 at 1.
1. GHURA
GHURA also
also admits,
ORIGINAL Rn@
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER ORDER GRANTING MOTION
MOTION FOR
FOR SUMMARY Page Page 11
11
JUDGMENT
however, that in pursuing community development development projects,
projects, it has never had to condemn condemn private
land before. Hr'g at before. Hr'g at 9:42.
9:42.
Unlike those other community community development
developmentprojects,
projects, the
the critical
critical distinction
distinction here is the
condemnation of private property.
of private property. When When condemning
condemning private
private property, a government agency
may exercise only those Powers powers granted to it. As noted it. As noted before,
before, this
this principle stems from a
veneration for property property rights. As articulated rights. As articulated by the United States Supreme Court,
property is more
more than
than the
the mere
mere thing
thing which
which aa person
person owns.
owns. It
It is
elementary that it includes the right toto acquire, acquire, use,
use, and
and dispose
dispose ofof it.
it. The
Constitution protects these these essential
essential attributes
attributes of
of property.
property. Property
consists of the free
free use,
use, enjoyment,
enjoyment, and disposal of a person's acquisitions without control or diminution save by the law of of the land.
Buchanan v.
v. Warley, Worley, 245 U.S. 60, 74 (1917).
(1917). The
The Court
Court also
also notes concerns
concerns by
by other
other courts
courts that
"a grant of the the power of eminent
eminent domain ...
...isisone
oneofofthe
theattributes
attributes of
of sovereignty
sovereignty most
most fraught
with the possibility possibility of abuse and injustice."
injustice." City
City of
ofBirmingham,
Birmingham, 2 So.2d at
at 308;
308, Norwood, 853
853
N.E.2d. 1118, 1118; see also Wise v. Yahoo Yazoo City,
City, 51 So. 453, 455 (Miss.
453,455 (Miss. 1910) (delegated eminent
powers "deserve[] no favor. To domain Powers To construe construe itit liberally
liberally would
would be
be sinning
sinning against
against the rights
of of property"). These These values
values and
and principles
principles surrounding
surrounding private
private property and
and the perils of
eminent eminent domain domain overreach overreach differentiate
differentiate this land acquisition acquisition from
from GHURA's
GHURA's past
past voluntary land
pursued for
transactions pursued for non-housing-related non-housing-related projects.
projects. In this case, a government agency is
interfering with private land ownership and use, use; the question over
over the legality of
of that act compels
a different lens from from that
that used
used when
when a government agency decides decides to
to use its own property or
property it acquired voluntarily.
This Court takes no position on whether GHURA GHURA has
has acted
acted within
within its
its statutory
statutory authority
in pursuing non-housing-related projects projects in
in general.
general. However,
However, when
whenitit comes
comes to
to this
this particular
particular
ll
QM 3l J
I
CV0692-24 DECISION AND ORDER ORDER GRANTING MOTION
MOTION FOR
FOR SUMMARY 12 Page 12
JUDGMENT
taking of ofland non-housing-relatedprob land for a non-housing-related project, act, the
the Court maintains a strict construction
approach and finds that GHURA acted acted ultra
ultra virus.
vires.
Iv. IV. CONCLUSION
The Legislature did not delegate broad powers Powers to
to GHURA to condemn property at its condemn property
Rather, its
discretion. Rather, its exercise of eminent domain is is limited to condemning
condemning land
land for
for projects
involving housing, involving housing, and and facilities
facilities adjunct to housing projects. Because Because that
that did
did not
not occur
occur here, the
Court GRANTS the motion for summary summary judgment
judgment in favor of
of the
the condemnees.
condemners.
A A Judgment Judgment shall shall issue, as well
issue, as well as
as aa separate
separate Order
-
Order r§'ibriii"Q"g
r§ii}frjg.the deposited
deposited funds.
funds.
:-- -= -- .. -
SO ORDERED, 20 November November 2025.
HON._EL HON.;ELYZE M. IRIARTE Judge,'Superior Judge/Superior Court of Guam
Appearing Attorneys: .
Florig, Jr.,
Eliseo M. Florin, Jr., Esq., Esq., for
for Plaintiff
Plaintiff Guam
Guam Housing
Housing and
and Urban
Urban Renewal
Renewal Authority
Mitchell F. Thompson, Esq., Thompson Thompson&& Alcantara, Thompson Thompson Alcantara, P.C., P.C., for Defendant Dr. Joel Joseph Jacqueline Taitano Jacqueline Taitano Terlaj Terlaje,
e, Esq.,
Esq., Law
Law Office
Office of Jacqueline Taitano Terlaj Jacqueline Taitano Terlaje, e, P.C.,
P.C., for
for Defendant
Defendant
Hong Yi Tian, Inc.
\.` I \ n
I
I
I
f