CHUUK STATE SUPREME COURT TRIAL
DIVISION
Cite as Songeni v. Fanapanges Municipality
10 FSM Intrm. 308 (
Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2001)
[10 FSM Intrm.
308]
ETIS SONGENI,
PURTASIO ESEPOM, and
JUAN
RAWIT,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
FANAPANGES
MUNICIPALITY,
Defendant.
CSSC CA NO.
55-2000
ORDER GRANTING
MOTION TO DISMISS
Soukichi
Fritz
Chief
Justice
Hearing: April 2,
2001
Decided: April 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
For the
Plaintiffs:
Ben K. Enlet, trial counselor
P.O. Box 1650
Weno, Chuuk FM 96942
For the
Defendant:
Maketo Robert, Esq.
Office of the Chuuk Attorney General
P.O. Box 189
Weno, Chuuk FM 96942
* * * *
HEADNOTES
Public Officers and Employees
) Chuuk
A person entering upon a public office is generally required to qualify by
performing all the steps customarily or legally required to hold the office.
This includes the taking of an oath of office and attendance upon the duties of
the office. Songeni v. Fanapanges Municipality, 10 FSM Intrm. 308,
309 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2001).
Civil Procedure )
Dismissal; Public Officers and Employees
) Chuuk
When the plaintiffs have never qualified for the public office for which they
seek compensation, their case will be dismissed. Songeni v. Fanapanges
Municipality, 10 FSM Intrm. 308, 309 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2001).
* * * *
[10 FSM Intrm.
309]
COURT'S OPINION
SOUKICHI FRITZ, Chief
Justice:
This
case comes before the Court after notice and hearing on Defendant's Motion to
Dismiss the Complaint wherein the Plaintiffs allege that they are the elected
members of the Fanapanges Municipal Council, but that they have not received pay
due them as such officials. The Defendant Municipality alleges and argued at the
hearing that the refusal to pay the Plaintiffs any compensation is on the
grounds that the Plaintiffs have refused to take the oath of office and have
refused to attend any of the meetings of the Fanapanges Municipal Council.
The rule is well settled that a person entering upon a public office is
generally required to qualify by performing all the steps customarily or legally
required to hold the office. This includes the taking of an oath of office and
attendance upon the duties of said office. See 63A Am. Jur. 2d Public
Officers and Employees §§ 127-134
(1984). In this case none of these steps appear to have been accomplished by the
Plaintiffs. Therefore, the Defendant's motion to dismiss on the grounds that the
Plaintiffs have never qualified for the office for which they seek compensation,
is due to be granted, and it is so ordered.
* * * *