Sablan v. Sarifi

Opinion

t-~··I LFD FT LE -- I; awwaazaa SUPERiORCGURT COURT UF OFGUMQ?GUAivi· l 2025 OCT -..1 zazsocr BH at I AM t.lt QM; 2 CLERK OF CLERK GF c·ouRT Unum

3 3

ROLAND ROLAND SABLAN, SABLAN,Administrator Administrator for for the the CIVIL CIVIL CASE CASE NO. CV0494-24 7 Estate ofJESSE Estate of JESSEJAMES JAMESTENORIO TENORIOSABLANSABLAN 8 II,

9 9 Plaintiff Plaintiff, 10 10 DECISION AND ORDER vs. II 11 TAKLAST SARIFI, TAKLAST RUEL 0. SARIFI, RUEL o. VALEN VALENCIA 12 d.b.a. DISH&THAT, CHUNG KUO KUO d.b.a. DISH&THA T, CHUNG INSURANCE INSURANCE co., CO.,LTD, LTD,and andDOES DOES 1-10 1-10 13 13 Inclusive, 14 Defendants. 15 15

16 INTRODUCTION 17

18 18 This matter matter came came before the the Honorable Honorable Arthur Arthur R. R. Barcinas Barcinas on on July July 3, 3, 2025, 2025, upon upon

19 Defendants' Ruel 0. Defendants' Ruel O. Valencia and and Chung ChungKuo KuoInsurance InsuranceCo., Co.,LTD. LTD.("Defendants") ("Defendants") Motion for

20 Summary Judgmentfiled Summary Judgment filedMay May 14, 14, 2025. 2025.Plaintiff Plaintiff Roland Sablan, Administrator for the Estate Sablan, Administrator Estate of of 21 Jesse James Jesse JamesTenorio TenorioSablan SablanIIII ("Plaintiff') ("Plalntiff') is is represented represented by Attorney Attorney Mark Mark Williams. Williams. 22 Defendants are represented Defendants are representedby byAttorney Attorney R. R. Marsil Johnson. Johnson. Having reviewed reviewed the the motions motions and and 23 23

24 24 having heard oral oral arguments in this arguments in thismatter, matter,the thecourt courtissues issuesthe thefollowing following Decision Decision and and Order.

25 26 Plaintiff initiated initiated this this action action as as Administrator Administrator for the the Estate Estate of ofJesse Jesse James James Tenorio 27 Sablan Sablan IIII ("Decedent"), ("Decedent"), on on September September 17, 17, 2024, 2024, asserting asserting two causes causes of action: action: negligence negligence 28 28 Decision Decision and Order CivilCase Civil Case No. No. CV0494-24 CV0494-24 Roland Roland Sablan, Sablan, Administrator of ofthe Estate ofjesse the Estate Jesse James Tenorio Sablan James Tenorio SablanIIII v. v. Taklast Taldast Sarifi, Sarili, Ruel O. Valencia Ruel 0. d.b.a. Chung Kuo d.b.a. Dish&That, Chung Kuo Insurance InsuranceCo., Co.,LTD, LTD,and andDOES DOES1-10I-i0 Inclusive.

against DefendantsTaklast against Defendants TaklastSarifi Sarifi("Mr. ("Mr. Sarifi"), Ruel Ruel O. 0. Valencia Valencia d.b.a. Dish&That ("Mr. d.b.a. Dish&That ("Mr. l

2 2 Valencia"), and John Valencia"), and John Doe Doe Insurance Insurance Carrier. Carrier. See, See, Comal., Compl., Sep. Sep. 17, 17, 2024. 2024. On On September September 30, 30,

3 3 2024, 2024, Plaintiff amended the complaint amended the adding Defendant complaint adding Defendant Chung Chung Kuo Kuo Insurance InsuranceCo., Co., LTD. LTD. 4 . . . . ("CKI"). See, See, Amended Compo. Compl. Sep. 30, 2024. 2024. The The clalms claims apse arise from from an an automobile automobile accldent accident 5 that occurred that occurred on on October October 7, 2022, at approximately 7, 2022, approximately 10:04 10:04 p.rn., p.m., on on or around around Route Route 16 in 6 7 Dededo, Dededo, Guam. Id. at Guam. Id. at 3. 3. Plaintiff alleges that Mr. Sarifi, while that Mr. while operating operating a 2003 2003 Toyota Pre 7

8 Runner owned by Runner owned by Mr. Valencia Valencia negligently negligently struck struck the the vehicle driven driven by by the the Decedent. Decedent. Id.

9 9 Plaintiff Plaintiff contends contends that the collision caused that the the Decedent caused the Decedent to to suffer severe bodily bodily injuries, injuries, pain pain 10 10 and suffering, and ultimately, and death. Id. ultimately, his death. Plaintiffwas Id. Plaintiff was the the duly duly appointed appointed administrator administrator and and 11 11 personal representative personal representativeof of the the Decedent's estate.Id. Decedent's estate. Id. at at 1. Plaintiff further l. Plaintiff further alleges alleges that that Mr. 12 12

13 13 Valencia's vehicle Valencia's vehiclewas was insured insured under under a liability liability policy policyissued issued by by CKI CKIand andthat, that,pursuant pursuant to 22

14 14 GCA §§18305, GCA CKIisisdirectly 18305, CKI directlyliable liablefor forany anyjudgment judgment against against Mr. Mr. Valencia Valencia up up to to the the policy policy 15 15 limits. Id. Id. 16 Defendants filed a Motion Defendants filed Motion for for Summary Summary Judgment on May Judgment on May 14, 2025. Plaintiff 14, 2025. Plaintiff filed an an 17 is Opposition Opposition to Defendants' Defendants' Motion Motionfor forSummary SummaryJudgment Judgment on onJune June 12, 12, 2025. Defendants filed 2025. Defendants filed a 18

19 19 Reply to to Plaintiffs PlaintiffsOpposition OppositiontotoDefendants' Defendants'Motion Motionfor forSummary SummaryJudgment Judgment on on June June 25, 25,

20 20 2025. 2025. The TheCourt Courttook tookthe thematter matter under under advisement advisement on on July July 3, 3, 2025. 2025. 21 21 DISCUSSION 22 In In resolving resolving Defendants' Defendants' Motion Motionfor forSummary SummaryJudgment, Judgment, the the Court Court must must first determine 23

24 whether a genuine genuine issue issue of of material material fact exists regarding what damages, damages, if if any, any, are recoverable 24

25 25 under Guam's survival under Guam's Title19 statutes,Title survival statutes, 19of ofthe theGuam GuamCode CodeAnnotated Annotated("G.C.A.") ("G.C.A.") §§31104 31104 and and

26 15 G.C.A. §§2209. 2209. The TheCourt Courtwill willthen thenaddress addresswhether whether Plaintiff Plaintiffhas has properly properly asserted asserted aa 27 27 wrongful death wrongful claim on death claim of the behalf of on behalf the heirs under 77 G.C.A. heirs under G.C.A. §§ 12109. 12109. Finally, Finally, the the Court will Court will 28

Page of Page 2 of7 Decision and Order Civil CivilCase Case No. No. CV0494-24 CV0494-24 Roland RolandSablan, Sablan, Administrator Administratorofofthe theEstate EstateofofJesse Jesse James Tenorio Sablan James Tenorio Sabian IIII v. Taldast Taklast Sarifi, Ruel O. 0. Valencia d.b.a. d.b.a. Dish&That, ChungKao Kuo Insurance Insurance Co., LTD, and DOES 1-10 1-10 Inclusive.

consider Plaintiffs contention consider Plaintiffs contentionthat that Defendants Defendants waived waivedarguments arguments under under §§ 12109 12109 and and §§ 2209, 2209, 1

2 2 and assess and assess whether whetherthe the record record supports supportsaafinding finding of Byaddressing of waiver. By addressing these these issues, issues, the

3 Court will ConN willdetermine determinewhether whethersummary summary judgment is is appropriate. appropriate. 4 I. PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF PROPERLY PROPERLYSEEKS SEEKSDAMAGES DAMAGESUNDER UNDER15 15G.C.A. G.C.A. §2209 § 2209 5 Summary judgment is Summary judgment is appropriate if the appropriate if the pleadings, pleadings, depositions, answers answers to 6

7 and admissions interrogatories, and admissionson onfile, file, together with the the affidavits, if ifany, any, show show that that there is no 7

s8 genuine issue as genuine issue as to to any material fact and any material that the and that entitled to party is entitled moving party the moving to aa judgment judgment as as a

99 matter matter of law. Hawaiian Rock Rock Products Products Corporation v. v. Ocean Ocean Housing, Housing, Inc., Inc., 2016 Guam ,r Guam 4411 10 10 s . o . 26. A genuine 26. genuine dispute dispute occurs occurs where where there there is is sufficient sufficient evldence evidence which which establishes establishes aa factual factual II dispute requiringresolution dispute requiring resolutionby byaafact-finder. fact-finder.Id. Id. A material material fact fact is is one one that that is is relevant relevant to an an 12 12

13 13 element of of aa claim claim or or defense and whose existence might affect affect the the outcome of ofthe the suit. Id. suit. Id.

14 In considering considering whether whether aa later later statute statute repealed repealed an an earlier earlier statute, statute, the tenets of of statutory statutory 15 15 construction direct the construction direct the analysis analysisto to first first look at at the the plain plain meaning meaning to resolve resolve apparent apparent conflicts 16 16 and and contradictions. contradictions. People v. v. Reselap, Reselap, 2022 Guam 2 ,r1]54. 2022 Guam 54. It It is is aacardinal cardinal rule rule of ofstatutory statutory 17 17 18 construction thatcourts construction that courtsmust mustlook lookfirst firsttotothe thelanguage languageof of the the statute statuteitself. itself Id. Id. Absent clear clear 18

19 19 legislative legislative intent intent to the the contrary, contrary, the the plain plain meaning meaning prevails. prevails. Sum itomo Const., Sumitomo Const., Ltd. Ltd. v. v.

200 Government of Guam, Government of Guam, 2001 Guam ,r 2001 Guam 1] 23. 23. Whenever Whenever a court court is is confronted confronted with with apparently apparently 21 conflicting legislation, legislation, its its goal goalisisto toascertain ascertain the the intent intent of ofthe the legislative legislativebody bodyand and construe construe the 22 law accordingly. accordingly. 23 23 19 G.C.A. §31104 §31104 states states when when the the person person entitled entitled to to maintain maintain such an action such an action dies dies before before 24

25 judgment, damages 25 judgment, damagesrecoverable recoverable for such injury shall be limited limited to to loss loss of ofearnings earnings and and expenses expenses

26 sustained 26 or incurred sustained or incurredas asaaresult resultof of the the injury injury by the the deceased deceased prior to his his death, death, and and shall shall not 27

Page 3 of7 Page 3 of Decision Decision and Order Civil Case Case No. No. CV0494-24 CV0494-24Roland Roland Sablan, Sablan,Administrator Administratorof ofthe the Estate of Jesse Jesse James Tenorio Tenorio Sablan Sablan II II v.v. Taklast Taldast Sarifi, Sariii, Ruel 0. O. Valencia d.b.a. Dish&That, Dish&That, Chung Kuo Insurance Co., LTD, LTD, and DOES DOES 1-10 Inclusive.

include damages for pain, damages for pain, suffering or disfigurement, disfigurement, nor nor punitive punitive or or exemplary exemplary damages, damages, nor 1

2 2 profits or prospective profits or earnings earnings after the date of death. death.

3 15 G.C.A. 15 G.C.A. §2209 §2209 (a) (a)states states that that no no cause of action cause of action shall be lost shall be by reason lost by of the reason of death of the death of 4 4 any any person person but may may be be maintained maintained by by or oragainst againstsuch suchperson's person's personal personal representative. representative. 15 15 5 G.C.A. G §2209 ( (b) b s says a y s t that h a t i in n a an n a caction t i o n b brought r o u g h t u under n d e r t hthis i s S Section e c t i o n a against g a i n s aa p personal erson 6

7 representative, all representative, all damages damages may may be awarded which be awarded which might have been been recovered recovered against against the 7

8 lived. 15 8 decedent had the decedent lived. 15 G.C.A. G.C.A. §2209 §2209 (c) (c)states states when when aa person person having having aa cause of cause of

9 9 action dies before before judgment, judgment, the damages damages recoverable by by the the decedent's decedent's personal personal representative 10 10 are limited limited to to such such loss loss or or damage damage as as the decedent sustained sustained or incurred prior to death, death, including 11 penalties or punitive or exemplary damages any penalties damages that that the the decedent would have been entitled entitled to 12 12

13 13 recover recover had had the the decedent decedent lived, lived, and and shall shall not not include include damages damages for pain, pain, suffering suffering or or

14 14 disfigurement. disfigurement. 15 15 The Defendants Defendants argue that that damages damages recoverable recoverable by a personal are strictly personal representative are 16 limited under 19 G.C.A. . §§ 331104, 1 1 0 4 , wwhich h i c h p precludes r e c l u d e s r erecovery c o v e r y f ofor r p pain, a i n , s suffering, u f e r i n g , ddisfigurement, is ent 17 18 punitive punitive damages, and post-death damages, and post-deathearnings, earnings,and andallows allows only only damages damages for lost lost earnings earnings and and 18

19 19 expenses expenses incurred incurred before death. death. See, See, Def. Mot. Mot. For ForSums. Summ.Jug. Jug.May May14, 14,2025. 2025. Because Because

20 Decedent died Decedent died instantly, instantly, Defendants Defendants contend contend that that there there were no no such such damages and therefore no 21 . . I . recovery y iss available a b l e under u n d e r Guam G u a m llaw. . IId. PPlaintiff l l l f responds r e s p o n d s that t h a t 15 1 5 G.C.A. G . C . A . §§ 2209, 220 which 22 governs the administration of a decedent's estate administration of authorizes additional estate authorizes additionalcategories categoriesof of recovery, 23 23 24 including punitive punitive damages damages and property damage.See, damage. See, Opp'n, Opp'n, Jun Jun 12, 12, 2025. 2025. 24

25 In In this this case, case, Plaintiff Plaintiff properly properly seeks seeks damages under15 damages under 15 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 2209. 2209. While While

26 Defendants 26 argue that Defendants argue thatrecovery recovery is strictly limited limited to to lost lostearnings earnings and and medical medical expenses expenses under under 27 27 19 G.C.A. §§31104, 31104, aa closer closer reading reading of ofthe the statutory statutory framework framework shows that 15 shows that 15 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 2209 2209 28

Page of Page 4 of7 Decision and Order Civil Case Civil Case No. No. CV0494-24 CV0494-24Roland RolandSablan, Sablan,Administrator Administratorof ofthe Estate of theEstate of Jesse Jesse James James Tenorio Tenorio Sablan Sablan II II v. Taddast Sarifi, Ruel 0. Taklast Sarifi, O. Valencia Valencia d.b.a. Dish&That, Dish&That, Chung Kuo Insurance Co., LTD, LTD, and DOES DOES 1-10 Inclusive.

1 provides provides a broader avenue of broader avenue of recovery. recovery. 15 G.C.A. §§2209 2209 expressly expressly states states that no cause that no cause of

2 2 shall be lost by action shall by reason reason of ofdeath death and and authorizes authorizes the decedent's personal personal representative to

3 3 maintain the the action, action, with with subsection subsection(b) ofall (b) permitting recovery of alldamages damages that that could have been 4 . . s . aawarded hhad a t the h e d decedent e c e d e n t l ilived, ved including u d i n g ppunitive unl l aand eexemplary y ddamages. amages Although A l

5 subsection ((c) excludes excludes damages damages for pain, pain, suffering, or disfigurement, it expressly expressly preserves the 6 7 availability availability of of punitive punitive damages damages and and penalties, penalties, which contrasts contrasts with the restrictions restrictions in 19 19 7

8 G.C.A. §§31104. 31104. The Thelegislative legislativecomment commenttoto§ §2209 2209confirms confirmsthis thisbroader broaderpurpose, purpose, noting noting that that

9 9 the provision represents the provision represents aacomplete completerevision revision of§ of § 573 of the 573 of the Probate Code of Probate Code (1970) and Guam (1970) ofGuam and 10 10 consolidates e s material m i a l from f r o m both b o t h §§ 574 5 7 of the h e Probate P r o b a t e Code C o d e and § 956 oof f the Civil Code. Thus, 11 15 G.C.A. §§2209 2209 isis not not aa radical radical departure departure from prior prior law but but instead the Legislature's instead reflects the Legislature's 12 12

13 13 intent to unify and intent to and expand the rules expand the rules for for survival survival of actions actions of of all all kinds kinds and and the the measure measure of

14 14 recovery in in cases cases involving involvingaadecedent. decedent. Under Underthe themies rulesofofstatutory statutoryconstruction, construction, courts courts must must 15 15 first look look to to the the plain plain meaning meaning of ofthe thestatutes statutes and and attempt attempt to harmonize harmonize them where possible. 16 16 Here, Here, the the more more specific specific provisions provisions of of 15 G.C.A.§ §2209 2209governing governingestate estateadministration administration 17 17 18 complement, ratherthan complement, rather thanrepeal, repeal,19 19G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 31104 31104 by by clarifying clarifying which which categories categories of ofdamages damages 18

19 19 survive and survive which do and which not. To do not. To adopt adopt Defendants' Defendants' interpretation interpretation would would effectively 15 effectively nullify 15

G.C.A. §§2209's 2209'spurpose purpose and and contradict contradict the the Legislature's Legislature's intent intent to to preserve preserve causes of action causes of action 21 21 through a personal personal representative. representative. 22 22 The Court The Court finds finds that Plaintiff may that Plaintiff may pursue recovery under pursue recovery 15 G.C.A. under 15 G.C.A. §§ 2209. 2209. 23 23

24 24 II. PLANTIFF PLANTIFF PROPERLY PROPERLY SEEKS SEEKS DAMAGES DAMAGES ONON BEHALF BEHALF OF OF THE THE HEIRS OF OF THE THE ESTATE ESTATE OF OF DECEDENT DECEDENTUNDER UNDER7 7G.C.A. G.C.A.§§12109. 12109. 25

26 26 7 G.C.A. 7 G.C.A. §12109 states that §12109 states that when the death when the death of of a person is a person is caused causedby by the the wrongful wrongful act act or or

27 27 ofanother, neglect of his or another, his or her her heirs heirs or or personal personal representatives representatives on on their their behalf behalfmay may maintain maintain an an 28 action for 28 action for damages againstthe damages against personcausing theperson causingthe thedeath. death.The Theright rightof ofaction actiongiven givenby by77G.C.A. G.C.A. §§

Page Page 5 of of77 Decision and Order Decision OMer Civil Case Civil No.CV0494-24 Case No. CV0494-24Roland RolandSablan, Sablan, Administrator ofthe Administrator of the Estate ofJesse Estate of Jesse James James Tenorio Tenorio Sablan Sablan IIII v. v. Taklast Taklast Sarifi, Ruel 0. Sarifi, Ruel O. Valencia d.b.a. Dish&That, Chung d.b,a. Chung Kuo Kuo Insurance InsuranceCo., Co.,LTD, LTD, and and DOES 1-10 Inclusive. DOES 1-10 Inclusive.

12109 is 12109 is a new new action action differing from that differing firm that which which the the decedent decedent would have had had if he had lived. 1

2 2 Newby v. v. Government Government of of Guam, Guam, 2010 2010 Guam ,i 25. Guam 4 11 25.AA wrongful wrongful death action is death action is not not aa

3 3 continuation or continuation or revival ofthe revival of action subsisting ofaction cause of the cause subsisting in in the the decedent decedent before before his his death death but but 4 4 instead is an original and cause of action and distinct cause action granted granted to heirs heirs and and personal personal representatives to 5 recover damages recover damages sustained sustained by by them themby by reason reasonof of the the wrongful wrongful death of the decedent. Id. Id. 6

7 The Defendants Defendants argued argued that thatPlaintiff Plaintiff does not properly properly seek damages damages on on behalf behalf of of the

8 Decedent's Decedent's heirs heirs under under Guam's Guam's wrongful wrongfuldeath deathstatute statuteand and thus thus not entitled to to damages damages under 7

9 G.G.A. §12109.See, §12109. See, Reply, Reply, Jun. 25, 2025. Jun. 25, 2025.However, However, Plaintiff Plaintiff properly properly seeks seeks damages damages on behalf 10 10 of ofthe the heirs of the the estate of Decedent under estate of under77 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 12109. 12109. In In the First Amended Complaint, 11 II asserts claims Plaintiff asserts claims on on behalf behalf of the the Decedent's Decedent's heirs heirs at at law law and and seeks seeks relief relief against against 12 12

13 13 Defendants. Id. at 4. Plaintiff Defendants. Id. Plaintiffasserted asserted in in Response Response to to Interrogatories Interrogatories that that Decedent's Decedent's estate estate and and

14 14 heirs are entitled to the the amount amount of oflost lost earnings earnings which which represent represent damages damages to the the estate estate and and the 15 15 heirs, as identified heirs, as identified in Response Response to to Request RequestNo.9, No.9, above. above. Id. Id. Plaintiff Plaintiff has also offered has also offered evidence 16 16 that Decedent regularly provided financial support provided financial to his support to his parents. parents. Id. Id. 17 17 The Court finds that Plaintiff Plaintiff properly properly asserted asserted damages on behalf damages on behalf of of heirs of of the the estate estate 18

19 19 of ofdecedent. decedent.

111. DEFENDANT DID NOT NOT WAIVE WAIVE THE ARGUMENT ARGUMENT THAT THAT PLANTIFF PLANTIFF IS NOT NOT ENTILED ENTILEDTO TORECOVER RECOVERUNDER UNDER7 G.C.A. 7 G.C.A.§ §12109 12109 OR OR15 G.C.A. § § 21 2209. 2209. 22 The Plaintiff Plaintiffstates states that that the Defendants' argument that thatthe thePlaintiff Plaintiff is not entitled to 23 23

recover under 24 recover under 77 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 12109 or 15 12109 or G.C.A. §§ 2209 15 G.C.A. 2209 was was waived. Id. at waived. Id. at 12. Plaintiff argues The Plaintiff 12. The argues 24

25 25 that this was that this andaastrategic intentionaland was intentional strategicdecision decisiontotoomit omit77G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 12109 or 15 12109 or 15 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 2209. 2209.

26 However, 26 However, Defendant's Defendant's argument was not argument was not intentional intentional nor nor aa strategic strategicdecision decisiontotoomit omit77G.C.A. G.C.A. § § 27 27 12109 or 15 12109 or G.C.A. §§ 2209. 15 G.C.A. 2209. The The Defendant Defendant initially initially argued argued that Plaintiff was that Plaintiff was not not entitled entitled to to 28

Page 6 of7 of Decision Decision and Order CivilCase Civil Case No. No. CV0494-24 CV0494-24 Roland Roland Sablan, Sablan, Administrator Administratorofofthe theEstate ofJesse Estateoil JamesTenorio Jesse James TenorioSablan Sabian!Iv. II v.Taklast TaklastSarifi, Sarifi, Ruel Ruel 0. O. Valencia d.b.a. d.b.a. Dish&That, Chung Kuo Insurance Co., LTD, and DOES l-[0 Insurance Co., 1-[0Inclusive, Inclusive.

damages for pain damages for pain and and suffering suffering and and for for earnings earnings after the date after the of death date of under 19 death under 19 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ I

2 2 31104. Id. at 31104. Id. The Plaintiff 4. The at 4. Plaintiff later later argued argued that their damages that their damages were were valid valid under under 77 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 12109 12109

3 3 and 15 G.C.A. and 15 G.C.A. §§ 2209. 2209. Id. Id. The The Defendant Defendant then then raised the argument raised the was not Plaintiff was thatPlaintiff argument that not entitled entitled 4 4 to to recover recover under under 77 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 12109 12109 or or 15 G.C.A. §§2209. 2209. Id. Id. at at 5. 5. The The Defendants Defendants withholding withholding 5 this this argument argument was not not aa strategic strategic decision decision nor norintentional. intentional. The The record record demonstrates demonstrates that that 66 7 Defendants' position Defendants' position on on 7 G.C.A. §§ 12109 7 G.C.A. 12109 and 15G.C.A. and 15 G.C.A. § § 2209 aroseonly 2209 arose relied Plaintiff relied afterPlaintiff only after 7

s8 on those provisions in opposition opposition and thus cannot cannot reasonably reasonably be characterized characterized as a deliberate deliberate

99 waiver. waiver. Instead, Instead, the sequence sequence of briefing reflects aa responsive responsive clarification clarification of the the applicable applicable 10 . . . . statutory framework rather than statutory than aa strategic omlsslon of strategic omission of available avallable defenses. 1I CONCLUSION 12

13 13 For the the foregoing foregoing reasons, reasons, the the Court Court DENIES Defendants' Defendants' Motion for for Summary Summary

14 14 Judgment. Judgement. 15 15

16 IT IS SO ORDERED - - -OCT 2025 0 '|'1 2025 ------- 17

18 18

19 I

20 HONORABLE ARTHUR R. BARCINAS 21 21 Judge, Superior Court of Guam

Page 7 of of7