Hernandez v. Taitano

1 Guam 470
CourtDistrict Court, D. Guam
DecidedJanuary 24, 1978
DocketCivil No. 77-0007-A
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Guam 470 (Hernandez v. Taitano) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Guam primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hernandez v. Taitano, 1 Guam 470 (gud 1978).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

OPINION

Briefly stated, this appeal results from a mandamus suit against certain officials of the government of Guam, in which they were ordered to pay the additional compensation to firemen provided for by Public Law 12-183. At oral argument, the Deputy Attorney General conceded two issues, leaving two others to be decided by this Court. These two issues are whether attorney’s fees and interest on the judgment were properly awarded.

Pursuant to the Organic Act of Guam, the government of Guam has sovereign immunity which can be waived only by an act of the local legislature:

The government of Guam . . . with the consent of the Legislature evidenced by enacted law may be sued upon any contract entered [471]*471into with respect to, or any tort committed incident to, the exercise by the government of Guam of its lawful powers. 48 U.S.C. § 1421a.

The appellees have not cited any enactment where the Guam Legislature has consented to a waiver of governmental immunity in a mandamus suit. We also have been unable to find any section in the Guam Code which would provide for an award of interest or attorney’s fees.1 The general rule is that the absence of such statutory authorization precludes the awarding of attorney’s fees and interest. Aycrigg v. United States, 124 F.Supp. 416 (N.D. Calif., 1954). We are not persuaded that any of the exceptions to the general rule is applicable in this case.

In view of the fait accompli of the payment of the additional compensation in this case, we do not reach the propriety of the mandamus issued in this case and- the payment apparently made pursuant thereto.

The award of attorney’s fees and interest on judgment is hereby removed from the judgment on appeal. Reversed.

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

Related

Aycrigg v. United States
124 F. Supp. 416 (N.D. California, 1954)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Guam 470, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hernandez-v-taitano-gud-1978.