KOSRAE STATE
COURT TRIAL DIVISION
Cite as Jackson v. Kosrae
10 FSM
Intrm. 198 (Kos. S. Ct. Tr. 2001)
[10 FSM Intrm. 198]
KENYE G.
JACKSON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
KOSRAE STATE and RENSLEY A. SIGRAH,
Defendant.
CIVIL ACTION 35-01
ORDER GRANTING PETITION;
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Yosiwo P. George
Chief
Justice
Decided: May 16, 2001
APPEARANCES:
For the
Petitioner: Canney
L. Palsis, Esq.
Micronesian Legal Services Corporation
P.O. Box 38
Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944
For the
Respondents: April
D.M. Skilling, Esq.
Acting
Attorney General
Office of the Kosrae Attorney General
P.O. Box 870
Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944
* * * *
HEADNOTES
Mandamus and
Prohibition
The Kosrae State Court has the power to issue writs of mandamus but
may only do so if the petitioner has met its burden to show that its rights to
the writ is clear and undisputable. The writ of mandamus is an extraordinary
remedy, the object of which is to require an official to carry out a clear,
non-discretionary duty. Jackson v. Kosrae, 10 FSM Intrm. 198, 199 (Kos. S. Ct.
Tr. 2001).
Mandamus and Prohibition; Public Officers and Employees) Kosrae
When the Kosrae State Code Section 18.506 requires a branch head to
make and transmit his final decision to the Director of Administration and the
appellant within 14 days of receipt of the committee's recommendation and more
than 14 days have elapsed since the branch head's receipt with no final decision
by him, the branch head has failed to carry out his clear, non-discretionary
duty to issue and transmit his final decision within the time period provided by
law. The petitioner's right to the writ of mandamus is thus clear and
undisputable and the writ will issue. Jackson v. Kosrae , 10 FSM Intrm. 198, 199 (Kos. S. Ct.
Tr. 2001).
[10 FSM Intrm.
199]
* * * *
COURT'S OPINION
YOSIWO P. GEORGE, Chief
Justice:
On April 3, 2001, Petitioner filed a Petition for
Writ of Mandamus. Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the Respondent,
Governor Sigrah of Kosrae State, to issue his decision pursuant to Kosrae State
Code, Section 18.506. On May 2, 2001, Petitioner filed a Request for Entry of
Default and Motion for Default Judgment. Defendant filed a Response to the
Request for Entry of Default and Motion for Default Judgment on May 14, 2001. In
his response, Defendant concedes that the proper action of this Court is to
grant the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and order the Respondent to make and
transmit his final decision in this matter.
Based upon the
information before this Court, the Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Mandamus
and Request for Default, the Respondent's Response, the file in this matter and
in the interests of justice, the Petitioner's Petition for a Writ of Mandamus
is granted.
I. Petition for Writ of
Mandamus.
This Court has the power to issue writs of mandamus
but may only do so if the petitioner has met its burden to show that its rights
to the writ is clear and undisputable. Ting Hong Oceanic Enterprises v.
Supreme Court, 8 FSM Intrm. 1 (App. 1997); Kos. S.C. § 6.101(a). The
writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, the object of which is to require
an official to carry out a clear non-discretionary duty. Senda v. Trial
Division, 6 FSM Intrm. 336 (App. 1994)
Kosrae State Code, Title 18 sets
forth the State Public Service System Act. Kosrae State Code, Section 18.506
requires a Branch Head to make and transmit his final decision to the
Director of Administration and the Appellant within 14 days of receipt of the
recommendation of the committee. In this case, the Appellant-Petitioner is an
employee of the Executive Branch, subject to the decision of the Governor as
Branch Head. The written Findings and Recommendation of the Ad Hoc Committee were
received by the Office of the Governor on November 14, 2000. No final decision
by the Governor has been transmitted to the Appellant-Petitioner to date. More than
14 days has elapsed since the receipt of the committee's Findings and
Recommendation by the Respondent Governor. Respondent has failed to carry
out his clear non-discretionary duty to issue and transmit his final
decision to the Appellant-Petitioner within the time period provided by
law. The Petitioner's right to the writ of mandamus is clear and
undisputable. Accordingly, the issuance of a writ of mandamus is proper.
II. WRIT OF MANDAMUS.
This Writ of Mandamus is issued to Respondent
Governor Rensley A. Sigrah. Respondent is ordered to make and transmit his final
decision in this matter within seven (7) days of service of this Order and Writ
of Mandamus. Respondent's final decision shall be transmitted to the
Appellant-Petitioner in accordance with Kosrae State Code, Section
18.506.
* * *
*