The U.S. District Court for the NMI has issued another writ of execution against Imperial Pacific International (CNMI) LLC’s personal property totaling over $1.4 million in favor of a group of IPI creditors.
Last Friday, U.S. District Court for the NMI Clerk of Court Heather Kennedy issued a writ of execution against IPI’s personal property in favor of IPI creditors USA Fanter Corp., Artman Corp., and James Whang dba South Pacific Lumber Company.
The writ of execution authorizes the seizure and sale of IPI’s personal property to satisfy the unpaid judgments the court previously granted for each creditor in their respective lawsuits against the casino investor.
When combined, the unsatisfied judgments equal about $1,402,126.88.
Specifically, back on March 20, 2023, the court granted a $500,000 judgment in favor of USA Fanter, a $106,890 judgment in favor of Artman Corp. on Jan. 17, 2023, and a $795,236.88 judgment in favor of James Whang in two separate cases.
The writ mandates that the amount raised should not exceed $1,402,126.88 plus post-judgment interest, costs, and fees. All funds raised will be deposited into the court’s registry where proceeds shall remain until after IPI has had an opportunity for an exemptions hearing, the court’s order states.
Originally, the application for this writ of execution included other IPI creditors who were awarded significant judgments by the CNMI Superior Court. The creditors are Fujitec Pacific Inc., Hemine Ipwan Islam dba IPWAN Security Services, and GT Building Systems International Ptd. However, U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona later excluded them, saying these three creditors only have state court judgments—not federal court judgments.
“Here, the CNMI judgment creditors do not have federal court judgments. Nor do they seek to register their judgments under an applicable federal statute. Because it is clear ‘Rule 69 is not available to enforce state court judgments in federal court,’ and the CNMI judgment creditors seek to enforce state court judgments pursuant to Rule 69, the court denies the application for writ of execution as to the CNMI judgment creditors. Rule 69 is not a vehicle through which federal courts can enforce state court judgments, which is exactly what the CNMI judgment creditors are attempting to accomplish,” Manglona said in her order.
