Mailei v. Peka

High Court of American Samoa

Mailei v. Peka

5 Am. Samoa 3d 12

CourtHigh Court of American Samoa

DecidedSeptember 4, 2001

DocketAP No. 01-01

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Am. Samoa 3d 12 (Mailei v. Peka) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering High Court of American Samoa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mailei v. Peka, 5 Am. Samoa 3d 12 (amsamoa 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Appellant’s motion for new trial was denied by the Land and Titles Division on May 2, 2000. He did not file a notice of appeal until March 1, 2001. A.S.C.A. § 43.080(b) requires that a notice of appeal must be filed within 10 days after the trial court denies a motion for new trial. In view of the facially excessive time interval between the denial of the motion for new trial and filing of the notice of appeal, the Court scheduled a motion to dismiss the appeal sua sponte. The motion was heard on August 24, 2001. Both counsel were present.

Appellant argues that we should find some way to disregard the tardy filing of the appeal to afford him an opportunity to have his day before this Court., However, other than a vague reference to judicial discretion, he did not cite, and admits he cannot find, any authority supporting his position. The statutory requirement of filing an appeal within 10 days after denial of a motion for new trial is mandatory. See Lualemana v. Asifoa, 17 A.S.R.2d 151, 152 (Land & Titles Div. 1989). This Court is without authority to proceed with this appeal. The appeal is therefore [13]*13dismissed.

It is so ordered.

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

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Appellant’s motion for new trial was denied by the Land and Titles Division on May 2, 2000. He did not file a notice of appeal until March 1, 2001. A.S.C.A. § 43.080(b) requires that a notice of appeal must be filed within 10 days after the trial court denies a motion for new trial. In view of the facially excessive time interval between the denial of the motion for new trial and filing of the notice of appeal, the Court scheduled a motion to dismiss the appeal sua sponte. The motion was heard on August 24, 2001. Both counsel were present.

Appellant argues that we should find some way to disregard the tardy filing of the appeal to afford him an opportunity to have his day before this Court., However, other than a vague reference to judicial discretion, he did not cite, and admits he cannot find, any authority supporting his position. The statutory requirement of filing an appeal within 10 days after denial of a motion for new trial is mandatory. See Lualemana v. Asifoa, 17 A.S.R.2d 151, 152 (Land & Titles Div. 1989). This Court is without authority to proceed with this appeal. The appeal is therefore [13]*13dismissed.

It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Am. Samoa 3d 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mailei-v-peka-amsamoa-2001.