u UPERIOH COURT GUM1
2022 FEB 16 PM 4' 49 COURT 1
2 3 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 4
5 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE ) PROBATE CASE NO. PR0063-76 6 ) 7 OF ) ) DECISION AND ORDER RE: 8 AUGUSTO GUTIERREZ, ) PETITION FOR CONFIRMATION OF ) COMMUNITY PROPERTY 9 DECEASED. ) ) 10 _______________________________) 11 INTRODUCTION 12 This Probate matter began over forty-five (45) years ago, on June 10, 1976, when heir 13
14 James C. Gutierrez ("James") filed a Petition for Special Letters of Administration of this estate.
15 Although the Court has previously observed the lack of any substantial progress of the probate of 16 this estate over the last four decades in its 2015 Decision and Order Re. Proposed Petitions for 17 Final Distribution (May 13, 2016), the delay occasioned by the continued contentious nature of 18 these proceedings merits further discussion, particularly in light of the Petition for Confirmation 19
20 of Community Property (the "Petition") currently before it. 1
21 The original heirs of this estate included James, Decedent's spouse Engracia M. Gutierrez
22 ("Engracia") and Decedent's other children Jane Gutierrez Maanao ("Jane"), Alvin D. Gutierrez 23 ("Alvin"), Charles C. Gutierrez ("Charles"), Thomas A. Gutierrez ("Thomas") and Barbara G. 24 Leon Guerrero ("Barbara"). Since the filing of the original Petition for Special Letters, several 25
26 1 The Court's predecessor assigned to this matter also expressed its concerns with the delays occasioned by the administrators during a status hearing on November 5, 2009 and ordered the co-administrators Barbara and James to 27 file accountings with the Court, among other actions. Status Hearing of 11/05/2009 at 10:58:22 AM to 11:09:22 AM (Nov. 05, 2009). 28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 1 of 13 1 original heirs have passed away, including Engracia, both co-Administrators Barbara and James
2 and Alvin and Jane. The current successor administrator is Kenneth J. Gutierrez, son of James 3 and grandson of the Decedent. Pet. for Letters of Admin. as Successor to James C. Gutierrez 4 (Dec. 31, 2020); Order Appointing Successor Administrator to James C. Gutierrez (Dec. 2, 5 2021). Counsels in this matter include Attorney F. Randall Cunliffe for Estate Administrator 6
7 Kenneth and Attorney Raymond Haddock for Petitioner Lemeral Camacho ("Petitioner" or
8 "Lemeral"). 2
9 Between 2013 and 2021, this Court has ruled on several disputes between the heirs, 10 mostly involving disputes over who shall serve as administrator of the Estate, but including 11 challenges to the validity of a prior map of the Estate which has since been nullified, 3 the failure 12 of prior co-administrators to make an accurate accounting of rents due to the Estate, and the First 13
14 and Final Account and Report of Co-Administrator and Petition for Its Settlement, for Allowance
15 of Fees and Costs and For Final Distribution (Nov. 23, 2015). 4 In its Findings of Facts and 16 Conclusions of Law Re. Objection to Distribution ("FFCL Re. Objection" or "March 2019 17 FFCL"), the Court found that Jane was entitled to a distribution of the Estate Property because a 18 piece of real property deeded to her by Augusto and Engracia did not constitute an advancement 19
20 of her interest in the Estate Property. FFCL Re. Objection (March 1, 2019). The Court also
21 identified the Estate Property to include the following:
22 1. Lot No. 23-2E-1, Agana Heights, Guam 23 2. Lot No. 23-2-R3-W, Agana Heights, Guam
24 2 Attorney John C. Terlaje previously represented Co-Administrator Barbara Leon Guerrero, however, upon her 25 death he was discharged as counsel. Order Granting Mot. to Withdraw as Counsel of Record for Co-Administrator Barbara Leon Guerrero (March 8, 2021). 26 3 Order Re: Map (Jan. 26, 2015) nullifying the map filed at the Department of Land Management, Government of Guam under Instrument No. 797782 and reinstating the map recorded on the 181h day of October, 2002 under 27 Instrument No. 664392A as the legal map of the Estate Properties. 4 Decision and Order Re. Proposed Petitions for Final Distribution (May 13, 2016). 28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 2 of13 1 3. Lot No. 46-New-4-5A-R2, Agana Heights, Guam
2 4. Lot No. 46-New-4-5A-2, Agana Heights, Guam and 5. Lot No. 46-New-4-5A-1, Agana Heights, Guam 3 (the "Estate Property") FFCL Re. Objection at~ 5. 4 Lemeral now brings this Petition seeking an Order of this Court confirming that the 5 Estate Property is not property of the Estate of Augusto Gutierrez after all, but rather, is the 6
7 property of the Estate of Engracia Matanane Gutierrez. 5 Pet. for Confirmation of Comm.
8 Property (Feb. 3, 2021). Kenneth filed his Objection to Petition for Confirmation of Community 9 Property on March 15, 2021, and Lemeral filed her Reply to Opposition on April 8, 2021. On 10 April 12, 2021, Kenneth filed a Submission of Deed. On November 18, 2021, this Court held a 11 hearing on the Petition for Confirmation of Community Property. Present at the hearing were 12
13 Kenneth Gutierrez with Counsel, Lemeral Camacho with Counsel and several heirs including
14 Joey Leon Guerrero (son of Barbara), Tom, Charles and Arnold Maanao (Jane's heir).
15 Having reviewed the record and relevant law, the Court now issues this Decision and 16 Order DENYING Lemeral Camacho's Petition. 17 DISCUSSION6 18 I. Petitioner Previously Sought Distribution Pursuant to Intestate Succession of 19 Decedent's Separate Property. 20 For over five years, Lemeral Camacho has argued that the Estate Property consists of the 21 five pieces of property which should be distributed to all heirs, including "the children of Jane 22 Gutierrez . . . as required by Guam Code Annotated, Title 15, Chapter 9." See Entry of 23
24 Appearance and Objection to Petition (Aprill3, 2016). In her April 2016 objection to then Co-
26 5 In the Matter of the Estate of Engracia Matanane Gutierrez and Alvin Don Gutierrez, Superior Court of Guam Probate Case No. PR0193-18. Lemeral is the Administrator ofthe Estate ofEngracia and Alvin. 27 6 Except as may be clarified herein, the Court incorporates its Findings of Fact as previously set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 20 of its March 2019 FFCL Re. Objection. 28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 3 of13 1 Administator James Gutierrez's First and Final Account and Report of Co-Administrator and
2 Petition for Settlement, Lemeral stated that "the heirs of the estate include the children of Jane 3 Gutierrez and [James] failed to make an equal or any distribution, to them as required by Guam 4 Code Annotated, Title 15, Chapter 2_." !d. (Emphasis added). Title 15, Guam Code Annotated, 5 Chapter 9 addresses the intestate "succession to Separate Property" of a decedent. Specifically, 6
7 Petitioner argued that Augusto and Engracia's inter vivos deed to Jane of Lot No. 46-NEW-4-
8 2A, Sinajana, Guam in 1969 was not an "advancement" nor did she waive any interest in the
9 Estate, and, therefore, "the assets of the estate of Augusto Gutierrez should be distributed 10 pursuant to Guam's law on intestate succession 15 GCA § 901 et seq. [Succession to Separate 11 Property]." Reply to Responses Filed by Administrators at pp. 2- 3 (Nov. 4, 2016)(emphasis 12 added). The provisions governing the succession to community property are found in Title 15, 13
14 Guam Code Annotated, Chapter 10 ("Succession to Community Property").
15 Now, for the first time since her appearance in 2016, Lemeral seeks an order of this Court
16 confirming that the property is not Augusto's separate property, but community property of 17 Augusto and Engracia and, thus, "no probate of Augusto's estate is necessary." Petition at~ 5. 18 Lemeral does not provide the Court any reason for the nearly five year delay in asserting that this 19 forty-five year old probate was no longer necessary. Instead, Petitioner sought the assistance of 20
21 the Court in the instant Probate to declare that Jane continued to have a right to distribution of
22 Augusto's separate estate, which included the five Estate Properties. 23 Petitioner, as a successor heir to Jane's interests in Augusto's estate, clearly benefitted 24 from the Court's March 2019 FFCL, which found that Jane did not waive her right to her 25 statutory share of the distribution of Augusto's Estate Property "pursuant to Title 15 of the Guam 26
27 Code Annotated, Chapter 9." Id. at~ 11 (emphasis added). Lemeral did not object to nor seek
28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 4 of13 1 amendment of any of the Court's findings or rulings as set forth therein, including the finding
2 that the five properties are the separate property of Augusto. !d. at~ 8. During the hearing on the 3 instant Petition, when asked by the Court whether the Community Property Affidavit filed by 4 Engracia was ever presented to Judge Barrett-Anderson in the decade after it was filed in 2002, 5 Petitioner's counsel responded that he had not researched whether the issue had been previously 6 7 addressed and relied only upon the fact that Engracia filed it prior to her death that same year. 7
8 At no time, including in Lemeral's current Petition, was the Court asked to review its
9 2019 FFCL based on newly acquired information or evidence, which arguably should have been 10 found by a simple title search on the property conducted as a standard practice of due diligence. 11 Additionally, the time for appeal of the Court's March 2019 FFCL identifying Estate Property as 12 the separate property of Augusto's estate has long lapsed and any appeal now would be 13
14 dismissed as untimely. See, G. R. App. 4(a)(1); Synap v. Cyfred, Ltd., 2008 Guam 10 ~ 10 (when
15 a party fails to comply with the 30-day window for filing a notice of appeal, dismissal is 16 mandatory). On this basis alone, the Court may DENY the Petition; nevertheless, the Court will 17 proceed to consider the substance of Lemeral' s claim that the Estate Property is community 18 property of Augusto and Engracia. 19 20 II. The Court Finds that the Property Is Not Community Property.
21 As discussed above, since her first appearance in this case, Lemeral has consistently
22 sought distribution of Estate Property to Jane's heirs pursuant to the provisions regarding the 23 succession to the separate property of Decedent Augusto Taitano Gutierrez, and not subject to 24
25 7 COURT: And at no time during the pendency, from 1976 until the filing of, Mr. Haddock, your petition, was the 26 issue of whether or not the property was community property ever raised before Judge Barrett-Anderson? MR. HADDOCK: Umm, your Honor, I'm not quite ... I'm not sure. I haven't researched that in regards to the 27 docket. However, urn, Engracia did file with Land Mangaement a Petition, or an Affidavit of Transfer of Community Property during her lifetime. Hrg. of 11118/2021 at 3:01:16 PM to 3:01:56 PM (Nov. 18, 2021). 28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 5 of13 1 Title 15, Chapter 10, Succession to Community Property, as it now seeks. The sole basis for the
2 Petitioner's claim that the Estate Property is community property is that Engracia was 3 Decedent's "surviving spouse" and because the Estate Property "was acquired by the Decedent 4 while married to Engracia Gutierrez" pursuant to the Administratrix Deed, the Estate Property 5 was held by the couple as community property. Pet. at~~ 5, 6; Ex. B. The mere fact that the 6
7 Decedent and Engracia were married at the time the property was deeded to Augusto in 1950 is
8 simply not determinative of the status of the property.
9 As evidence of her claim that the entirety of Augusto's estate is community property, 10 Petitioner submits Exhibit A to her Reply To Opposition, Document No. 654113, dated March 11 28, 2002, in the Department of Land Management, Government of Guam, entitled "Affidavit of 12 Passage of Community Property to Surviving Spouse Without Administration". This document 13
14 declares as follows:
15 At the time of the death of my spouse, Augusto T. Gutierrez, we had acquired during the course of our marriage, the following described real and personal 16 properties to wit: 17 Lot No. 23-2E-1, Municipality of Agana Heights, Guam. A copy of the map is attached hereto and incorporated herein as exhibit C. 18
19 Ex. B to Petition. No map was attached for the Court's review.
20 Although Petitioner's Affidavit only claims Lot No. 23-2E-1, Municipality of Agana 21 Heights, Guam as community property, Petitioner asserts that "as all the properties in this matter 22 are covered by the same [1950] deed, the affidavit [of passage of community property] filed 23 creates a cloud on the entire Estate if not divesting any interest the estate has in the property." 24
25 Reply at 3. Even if the Court assumes that Lot No. 23-2E-l is community property as set forth in
26 Engracia's Affidavit, Petitioner does not provide any factual basis or legal authority for such
27 reach beyond Lot No. 23-2E-l. 28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 6 of13 1 On the contrary, the Petitioner erroneously asserts that all of the Estate Property is
2 community property simply because they were acquired during the marriage of Augusto and 3 Engracia. Petition at ,-r 6 ("the aforementioned property was acquired by the Decedent while 4 married to Engracia Gutierrez pursuant to deed attached as Exhibit B"); Reply to Opp. at p. 4 5 {"The Court should confirm the passage of [the Estate property] as the community property of 6
7 the Augusto Gutierrez and Engracia Gutierrez and its passage to the Estate of Engracia as all the
8 lots were purchased by the deceased during his marriage to Engracia Gutierrez and no evidence
9 to the contrary has been produced to rebut the presumption."). Petitioner does not provide any 10 agreement between the couple that the property would be held either as separate or community 11 property and the Deed does not provide any support for this claim. 12 The Guam Supreme Court addressed a similar (if not reverse) issue in Sablan v. Sablan, 13
14 2017 Guam 3. There, the husband argued that certain real property which he obtained during the
15 marriage of the parties in 1990 was not community property because, although it was deeded to
16 him and his former wife "as husband and wife," this resulted in a tenancy in common, rather than 17 community property. Rejecting this argument, the Guam Supreme Court found that "while pre- 18 1980 deeds which convey property to grantees as 'husband and wife' without specifying the type 19 of tenancy are subject to the presumption that the spouses hold the property as tenants in 20
21 common, post-1980 deeds are subject to the presumption of community property." Sablan v.
22 Sablan, 2017 Guam 3, ,-r 26 (Guam June 16, 2017). 23 Thus, the Guam Supreme Court, discussing the evolution of Guam's community property 24 laws, has pronounced that prior to 1980, property held by spouses was presumptively held as 25 tenants in common, not as community property. Id. In so ruling, the Guam Supreme Court 26
27 acknowledged that Guam's community property laws, which were based upon California's then-
28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 7 of 13 1 existing community property laws were not changed to follow the amendments later enacted in
2 California, including treating joint tenancy property as community property for the purposes of 3 division in a dissolution of marriage case. In this regard, the Guam Supreme Court observed: 4 Although in 1953 Guam enacted its community property laws borrowing from 5 California's then-existing community property statutes, compare Guam Civ.Code §§ 161-164 (1970) with Cal. Civ.Code §§ 161-164 (1941), several amendments 6 have since been made to the California statutes that have not been adopted in 7 Guam. This includes the 1965 provision added to California Civil Code section 164 that treats joint tenancy property as community property for purposes of 8 dividing such property upon divorce. Instead, in 1980, the Guam Legislature through Public Law 15-113 repealed its community property statutes and 9 reenacted them with several changes, including the addition of the language now found in 19 GCA § 6101(a)(8), which states: "Separate property means: ... each 10 spouses's undivided interest in property owned in whole or in part by the spouses 11 as co-tenants in joint tenancy or as co-tenants in tenancy in common." 19 GCA § 610l(a)(8) (emphasis added). Thus, while there is a rebuttable statutory 12 presumption that property acquired by either spouse or both spouses during marriage is community property, 19 GCA § 6105(a) (2005), the Guam 13 Legislature has specifically classified as separate property a spouse's interest in 14 joint tenancy property.
15 Babauta v. Babauta, 2011 Guam 15, ~ 24 (emphasis added). Thus, while property acquired 16 during marriage by either husband or wife, or both, is presumed to be community property under 17
18 19 G.C.A. § 6105, deeds to "husband and wife" which pre-date 1980 are held by the couple, at
19 best, as tenancies in common, not as community property. Each spouse's undivided interest in
20 property owned in whole or in part by the spouses as co-tenants in joint tenancy or as co-tenants 21 in tenancy in common is that spouse's separate property. 19 GCA § 6101 (a)(8); Babauta, supra. 22 As noted herein, Petitioner's only basis for asserting a claim of community property on 23 behalf of Engracia is the mere fact of her marriage to Augusto at the time he purchased the 24
25 property (or was granted the deed to the property). As more fully discussed below, nothing in
26 the language of the deed conveyed the property to both of them "as husband and wife" to hold as
27 community property nor has Petitioner produced any written agreement between Augusto and 28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 8 of13 1 Engracia evidencing an intent to hold the property as community property. See, Damian v.
2 Damian, 2015 Guam 12, fn. 2; 19 GCA § 6112(a). 3 In examining the Recitals to the Deed, nothing in the language of the deed itself suggests 4 that the property was deeded to both Augusto and Engracia. The Deed indicates that there was an 5 agreement between Augusto T. Gutierrez and Tomas Cruz Gutierrez in 1938, to convey the 6
7 property which is now the subject of the probate to Augusto. It appears that Grantor Tomas Cruz
8 Gutierrez passed away before the property could be transferred pursuant to the agreement
9 between Augusto and Tomas, and, after Maria Gutierrez was appointed administratrix of 10 Tomas's estate in 1950, the Deed conveyed to "Augusto T. Gutierrez, married to Engracia 11 Matanane Gutierrez, party of the Second Part" what is now the Estate Property. 12 Importantly, the Administratrix's Deed submitted in support of her Petition identifies the 13
14 Grantee of the Estate Property to be "Augusto T. Gutierrez, married to Engracia Matanane
15 Gutierrez, the party of the Second Part." Ex. B. The Deed does not convey the Estate Property to
16 Augusto and Engracia "as husband and wife." Language of conveyance is significant. See, 17 Babauta v. Babauta, 2011 Guam 15, fn. 2 (Record on Appeal ("RA"), Trial Ex. 16 at 1 18 (Warranty Deed, Oct. 24, 2003) ("GUAM LAND AND REALTY DEVELOPMENT, LTD., ... 19 do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto EVANGELIS J. BABAUTA and ANTONETTE 20
21 L. BABAUTA, husband and wife, and their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, as joint
22 tenants with right of survivorship, ... the following real property situated within Guam ...." 23 (emphasis added)). As the Guam Supreme Court stated in Sablan, for deeds pre-dating July 24 1980, unless the spouses have a written agreement to the contrary, the presumption created is a 25 joint tenancy, not community property. Petitioner simply has not established her burden of 26 27 rebutting this presumption based on the record before this Court.
In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 9 of13 1 Applying the law of community and separate property as articulated by the Guam
2 Supreme Court in Damian, Babauta and Sablan, the Court must also determine whether the 3 Estate Property is truly the separate property of Augusto, or if the Estate Property consists of 4 Augusto's interests in the Estate Property as a joint tenant with Engracia. If the Court interprets 5 the Deed to have granted the Estate Property to Augusto without the language also conveying 6 7 any interest to Engracia, the Estate Property was the sole and separate property of Augusto.
8 Otherwise, it was held as a joint tenant with Engracia.
9 lll. The Estate Property Consists of Augusto's One-Half Separate Property Interest in 10 the Five Properties as a Joint Tenant.
11 While the Opposition to the Petition is sparse and based largely upon Petitioner's
12 standing to advance a community property claim on Engracia's behalf and the cost of probating 13 two estates rather than one, 8 during the hearing on the Petition, counsel for James argued that the 14 property was acquired by Augusto in 1938, one year prior to Augusto and Engracia's marriage, 15 when the Deed was given to Augusto but not recorded. Hrg. on 11/18/21 at 3:02:00 to 3:02:31 16 17 (Nov. 18, 2021). However, this allegation is contradicted by the language in the Deed itself
18 which recites that it is an Administratrix Deed "made on the 30th day of November, 1950,
19 between Maria T. Gutierrez, as the duly appointed, qualified and [illegible] administratrix of the 20 estate of Tomas Cruz Gutierrez, deceased, party of the First Part, and Augusto T. Gutierrez, 21 married to Engracia Matanane Gutierrez, party of the Second Part .... "Exhibit B to the Petition; 22 Kenneth J. Gutierrez's Submission of Deed (April 12, 2021). Thus, the Estate Property was 23
24 conveyed to and Augusto's ownership of the property arose through the 1950 Administratrix
26 8 The argument that Lemerallacks standing to assert Engracia's community property interest is contradicted by 15 G.C.A. §1005 which allows someone other than surviving spouses to file Community Property Petitions. In any 27 event, Engracia is purported to have asserted her community property rights by filing the Affidavit prior to her death. 15 G.C.A. §1005(b). 28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 10 ofl3 1 Deed, not, as urged by Kenneth, through an agreement to purchase the properties made sometime
2 in 1938. Nor was the Deed given prior to Tomas's death or Augusto and Engracia's marriage. 3 The character of property is generally fixed at the time of acquisition. Damian at ~ 24 4 (citing In reMarriage of Rossin, 91 Cal. Rptr. 3d 427, 432 (Ct. App. 2009) ("The character of 5 the property as separate or community is fixed as of the time it is acquired; and the character so 6
7 fixed continues until it is changed in some manner recognized by law, as by agreement of the
8 parties."). In this case, Augusto acquired his interest in the Estate Property after his marriage to
9 Engracia. Applying the holdings in Sablan, Babauta and Damian, as well as statutory law, the 10 Court must fmd that, absent an agreement between Augusto and Engracia as to the nature of the 11 property, the presumption is that the Estate Property was held by both Augusto and Engracia, not 12 as community property, but as joint tenants, with each spouse holding an undivided interest in 13
14 the property as his or her separate property. "Separate property" means each spouse's undivided
15 interest in property owned in whole or in part by the spouses as co-tenants in joint tenancy or as 16 co-tenants in tenancy in common. 19 GCA § 610l(a)(8). Thus, having taken the property as joint 17 tenants, Augusto and Engracia each had an undivided one-half separate property interest in the 18 Estate Property. See 19 GCA § 6101(a)(8); Baubauta at ~ 27. To the extent that this finding 19
20 clarifies the Court's earlier finding in its March 2019 FFCL as to the nature and character of the
21 five (5) properties in the Estate, the Court amends~ 8 of the March 2019 FFCLs.
22 The Affidavit of Community Property filed by Engracia in 2002 notwithstanding, the five 23 properties identified herein and in the March 2019 FFCLs are not community property of 24 Engracia and Augusto; therefore, Lemeral's Petition is denied. However, Augusto's interest in 25 the Estate Property as his separate property is governed by the law of succession of separate 26
28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 11 of13 1 property under 15 GCA § 903 as to his undivided one-half separate property interest in the five
2 lots. 3 CONCLUSION 4 The Guam Supreme Court has held that, for Deeds which pre-date July 1980 such as the 5 one at bar, there is a rebuttable presumption that property acquired by a spouse during the 6 marriage is held by the couple as joint tenants, not as community property. This presumption 7
8 may be rebutted by proof of a written agreement between the spouses designating the property as
9 either separate or community property. In this case, neither Petitioner nor James provided any
10 evidence of Augusto's or Engracia's intent to hold the property other than as set forth herein. 11 For these reasons, the Court finds that the Estate Property (that is, all five lots), were held 12 by Augusto and Engracia as joint tenants. Consequently, Augusto's separate property subject to 13 probate is defined as his one-half undivided interest in the Estate Property. 14
15 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Lemeral's Petition for Confirmation of Community
16 Property is hereby DENIED.
17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Mfidavit of Passage of Community Property To 18 Surviving Spouse Without Administration filed by Engracia Gutierrez on May 28, 2002, at the 19 Department of Land Management, Government of Guam under Document No. 654113 is hereby 20 nullified and void. 21
23 II 24 II 25 II 26 II 27
28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 12 of 13 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Administrator of the Estate shall file his Petition
2 for Final Distribution seeking distribution of the Estate Property as set forth herein within ninety 3 (90) days of the issuance of this Decision and Order. 4 FEB 16 2022 5
8 JUDGE, SUPERIOR COWT OF GUAM \ ...
9 10
14 15
20 21
22 23
26 27
28 In re Estate ofAugusto Gutierrez; PR0063-76 Decision and Order re. Petition for Confirmation of Community Property Page 13 ofl3