Pese v. Lefiti

High Court of American Samoa

Pese v. Lefiti

10 Am. Samoa 3d 400

CourtHigh Court of American Samoa

DecidedOctober 3, 2005

DocketMT No. 07-04

StatusPublished

This text of 10 Am. Samoa 3d 400 (Pese v. Lefiti) 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

Pese v. Lefiti, 10 Am. Samoa 3d 400 (amsamoa 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This matter came on regularly for trial this October 3, 2005. Counter-claimant Matefili P.F. Lefiti (“Lefiti”) having previously filed on May 6, 2005, his notice to withdraw and dismiss his counterclaim, the only parties appearing for trial were claimant Atiulagi F. Pese, with his counsel Salanoa S. Aumoeualogo, counter-claimant Nicholas Punimata (“Punimata”), through his counsel Fiti A. Sunia, and counter-claimant Maui L. Mailo (“Maui”), appearing pro se. Punimata, through his counsel, and Maui in person moved in open court to withdraw and dismiss their respective counterclaims.

Wherefore, the counterclaims of Lefiti, Punimata, and Maui being withdrawn, they are hereby dismissed.

There thus being no “disputed claim” before us for determination under A.S.C.A. § 1.0409, this matter is remanded back to the Territorial Registrar’s Office. It is so ordered.

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

ORDER

This matter came on regularly for trial this October 3, 2005. Counter-claimant Matefili P.F. Lefiti (“Lefiti”) having previously filed on May 6, 2005, his notice to withdraw and dismiss his counterclaim, the only parties appearing for trial were claimant Atiulagi F. Pese, with his counsel Salanoa S. Aumoeualogo, counter-claimant Nicholas Punimata (“Punimata”), through his counsel Fiti A. Sunia, and counter-claimant Maui L. Mailo (“Maui”), appearing pro se. Punimata, through his counsel, and Maui in person moved in open court to withdraw and dismiss their respective counterclaims.

Wherefore, the counterclaims of Lefiti, Punimata, and Maui being withdrawn, they are hereby dismissed.

There thus being no “disputed claim” before us for determination under A.S.C.A. § 1.0409, this matter is remanded back to the Territorial Registrar’s Office. It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 Am. Samoa 3d 400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pese-v-lefiti-amsamoa-2005.