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