THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA
APPELLATE DIVISION
Cite as Iriarte v. Etscheit ,
8 FSM Intrm. 263 (App. 1998)
ISO NAHNKEN OF NETT SALVADOR IRIARTE,
MISAIL
PADAHK, KINDINIANO LIGORIO, WALTER EKIEK,
HENRY PHILLIP, BELERINO PHILLIP, BERNARD JACK,
ENERIKO
RODRIGUEZ, MASAUO SULDAN, SULIANA PANUELO,
EMILIANA MARTIN, NADIP CANTERO, PASTOR PHILLIP,
ANTONIO SULDAN, ALBON SULDAN, TERESITA DAMARLANE,
AUGUSTINE DAMARLANE,
SULIANA (JULIE) REX,
CLAUDIO PANUELO, IOAKIN CANTERO, FELIX
PEISO,
MARTINO RODRIGUEZ, ALPHONSO LAURTIN, EMIEL ANAS,
ENERIKO ANNES, ROMINI PANUELO, LINUS ACTOUKA
and HERCULANO KOHLER,
Appellants,
vs.
CAMILLE ETSCHEIT, ROBERT ETSCHEIT, SR.,
ESTATE OF
LEO ETSCHEIT, ESTATE OF ELLA ETSCHEIT JOUBERT, ROBERT ETSCHEIT, JR., individually and in his
capacity as Administrator, PACIFIC MISSIONARY AVIATION,
PONAPE ENTERPRISES CO., POHNPEI AGRICULTURAL
DEVELOPMENT,INC.,
CAROLINE ISLAND DEVELOPMENT CO.
and
HEIRS OF FLORENTINE
ETSCHEIT,
Appellees.
APPEAL CASE NO. P5-1996
ORDER DENYING PETITION
Rehearing Denied: March 5, 1998
BEFORE:
Hon. Richard H. Benson, Associate Justice, FSM Supreme Court
Hon. Martin G. Yinug, Associate Justice, FSM Supreme Court
Hon. Lyndon L. Cornelius, Temporary Justice, FSM Supreme Court*
*Chief Justice, Kosrae State Court, Lelu, Kosrae
APPEARANCE:
For the Appellants: Charles Greenfield, Esq.
(Padahk et al.) Micronesian Legal Services Corporation
P.O. Box 129
Kolonia, Pohnpei FM 96941
* * * *
HEADNOTE
Appeal and Certiorari ) Rehearing
The court may summarily deny a petition for rehearing and order the mandate issue immediately when it has carefully considered all of the appellants' arguments and has neither overlooked nor misapprehended any points of law or fact. Iriarte v. Etscheit, 8 FSM Intrm. 263, 264 (App. 1998).
* * * *
COURT'S OPINION
PER CURIAM:
The appellants, except for Iso Nahnken of Nett Salvador Iriarte, filed a petition for rehearing on February 3, 1998. We deny the petition. We have carefully considered all of the appellants' arguments and have neither overlooked nor misapprehended any points of law or fact. See FSM App. R. 40(a). A summary denial is therefore proper. Let the mandate issue immediately. FSM App. R. 41.
|
||