{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;} {\f36\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols{\*\falt Courier New};}{\f169\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f170\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;} {\f172\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f173\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f174\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f175\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);} {\f176\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f177\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255; \red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;} {\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\* \ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid3229395 \rsid9508377\rsid9904948\rsid12518062\rsid12537345}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min2}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy14\hr10\min2}{\version4} {\edmins2}{\nofpages8}{\nofwords2880}{\nofchars16420}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}{\nofcharsws19262}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3 \jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot12537345 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12537345 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12537345 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12537345 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12537345 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery1440\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid12537345\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid12537345 Rinehart v. Rinehart}{\fs20\insrsid12537345 , Opinion\tab Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid12537345 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid12518062 8}}}{\fs20\insrsid12537345 of 12 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12537345 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl-19\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid12518062 {\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft1440\shptop0\shpright10800\shpbottom19\shpfhdr1\shpbxpage\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt1\shpz0\shplockanchor\shplid2049{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}} {\sp{\sn fillColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fillBackColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFilled}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fShadow}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fBehindDocument}{\sv 1}} {\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxpage\dobypara\dodhgt0\dprect\dpx1440\dpy0\dpxsize9360\dpysize19\dpfillfgcr0\dpfillfgcg0\dpfillfgcb0\dpfillbgcr0\dpfillbgcg0\dpfillbgcb0\dpfillpat1\dplinehollow}}}}{\fs20\insrsid12537345 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12537345 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}} {\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 ROBERT H. RINEHART}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Plaintiff-Appellant}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 vs.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 MARY S. RINEHART}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Defendant-Appellee}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Supreme Court Case No. CVA98-020 \par Superior Court Case No. DM0761-97}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Filed: April 11, 2000}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Cite as: 2000 Guam 14}{\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 OPINION}{\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam. \par Argued and submitted on May 10, 1999 \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trgaph120\trleft0\trhdr\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid12518062 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4658\clshdrawnil \cellx4658\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4701\clshdrawnil \cellx9359\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par }{\ul\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Appearing for the Plaintiff-Appellant:}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par Seaton M. Woodley, III, Esq. \par Law Offices of Seaton M. Woodley, III \par Suite 202, 134 Chalan Santo Papa \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, GU 96910\cell \par }{\ul\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Appearing for the Defendant-Appellee:}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par Robert L. Keogh, Esq. \par Law Offices of Keogh & Forman \par Suite 105, C & A Professional Bldg. \par 251 Martyr St. \par P.O. Box GZ \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, GU 96932 \par \cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trgaph120\trleft0\trhdr\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid12518062 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4658\clshdrawnil \cellx4658\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4701\clshdrawnil \cellx9359\row }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 BEFORE:}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 BENJAMIN J. F. CRUZ, Chief Justice, PETER C. SIGUENZA, Associate Justice, and JOHN A. MANGLONA, Designated Justice.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 CRUZ, C.J.: \par }{\b\insrsid12518062 \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [1]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab On June 27, 1998, the trial court declared a final judgment of divorce between Robert and Mary Rinehart.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Robert H. Rinehart, hereinafter }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Robert,}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 appeals the trial court}{ \insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision to allow telephonic testimony during the bench trial.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Robert also appeals the trial court}{ \insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s order that he repay the community for one-half of the money expended for repayment of his student loan and the trial court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s order that an account, which his wife placed in both their names, be deemed her separate property.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 On cross appeal, Mary S. Rinehart, hereinafter }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Mary,}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 appeals the trial court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision to allow this judgment to be paid without interest.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Based upon the following discussion, the trial court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded in part consistent with this opinion.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 I.}{\b\insrsid12518062 }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND}{\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062\charrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [2]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Robert and Mary were married on February 6, 1988.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Their first and only child was born on April 29, 1991.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In July 1996, the family moved to Guam where Robert was stationed.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 During their stay in Guam, the couple argued repeatedly over an extramarital affair Mary confessed to having in the past.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [3]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab In late June 1997, Mary flew from Guam to Connecticut with the couple}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s daughter.}{ \cs15\super\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12537345 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid12537345 Mary stated at the trial court that she believes she left Guam on June 29, 1997, but that she is uncertain. Transcript, vol. II, pt. 1, p. 10 (Continued Bench Trial, Feb. 10, 1998).}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In August, Mary informed Robert that she would not return to Guam.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 On August 29, 1997, Robert filed for divorce in Guam.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Robert served his wife by publication. Mary retained local counsel and filed an answer and counterclaim exactly one month later.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [4]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Prior to trial, Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s counsel advised the court that Mary would not return to Guam for the proceedings. The court ruled that Mary could participate and testify via telephone, an allowance to which Robert}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s counsel firmly objected.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Transcript, vol. I, p. 18 (Bench Trial, Feb. 6, 1998).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In its findings of fact and conclusions of law, the trial court granted Robert}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s request for a divorce based upon }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s infliction of extreme and grievous mental suffering.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Rinehart v. Rinehart,}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 DM 0761-97 (Super. Ct. Guam Mar. 11, 1998).}{ \insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The trial court made a number of rulings on community assets, custody and visitation matters, retirement funds, and child support.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [5]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Robert takes issue with the trial court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision that his student loan is a separate debt and its order that he must reimburse Mary $7, 268 for one-half of the amount that the community paid on the loan.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Robert also expresses concern that the trial court found the Farmer}{ \insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s & Mechanic}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s Bank deposit, an account that Mary put in both of their names once they were wed, to be Mary}{ \insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s separate property.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Mary argues that the trial court failed to include an account in its findings of fact and conclusions of law and that she should be given half the value of the account, plus interest.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [6]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab On May 26, 1998, Robert filed a motion to reconsider the ruling on the admissibility of the telephonic testimony as well as the monetary judgment.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The lower court rejected both Robert}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s and Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s claims on June 27, 1998.}{ \insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Robert filed this appeal and Mary subsequently filed a timely cross-appeal.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 II.}{\b\insrsid12518062 }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 ANALYSIS AND APPLICATION OF LAW}{\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [7]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab This court has jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to Title 7 GCA }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 3107(a) and 3108(a), (1994).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 We review the trial court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision on the telephonic testimony for abuse of discretion.}{ \insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See Bonamarte v. Bonamarte}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 , 866 P.2d 1132, 1133 (Mont. 1994).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 We review the trial court}{ \insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision on the student loan for an abuse of discretion.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See Bliss v. Bliss, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 898 P.2d 1081, 1083 (Idaho 1995).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The controversies regarding the Farmer}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s and Mechanic}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s Bank Account and interest on the judgment are questions of law that will be reviewed }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 de novo.}{\i\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Camacho v. Camacho}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 , 1997 Guam 5, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 24.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 A.}{\b\insrsid12518062 }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Telephonic Testimony}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [8]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 7301, (1994) provides that }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [t]he testimony of a witness may be ta ken by affidavit, by deposition or by oral examination.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Mary argues that telephonic testimony should be considered a type of oral examination and that she therefore complied with this rule.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 She argues that the facts in this case and the gray areas within the existing laws would allow for telephonic testimony.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Robert argues that the courts should interpret this rule strictly.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Based upon analyses of legal rules and case law, this court holds that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing Mary to testify telephonically.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [9]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab In addressing this contention, we see fit to follow the maxim }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 expressio unius est exclusio alterius.}{\i\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 This rule of statutory construction means that if an option is expressed in a law, all other options not expressed were intentionally excluded.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See generally}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{\scaps\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Sutherland Stat. Const.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 47.23 (5}{\super\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 th}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 ed. 1992).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Courts have been warned to use this maxim prudently. }{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Abdullah v. American Airlines, Inc., }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 181 F.3d 363, 372 (3}{\super\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 rd}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Cir. 1999)}{ \i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 (}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 it should be taken with a grain of salt }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 66 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 or even better, with a grain of common sense}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 ); }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Bowers v. Town of Smithberg, }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 173 F.3d 423, 1999 WL 51878 at **3 (4}{\super\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 th}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Cir. 1999)}{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 (mentioning that it should be }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 only used with caution}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 ).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The phrase is meant to act as an interpretive rule, rather than act as a deliberate law.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 (describing the phrase as }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 merely an auxiliary rule of statutory construction}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 ); }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Rooks v. Dep}{\i\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 t. of Health and Human Services, }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 35 Fed. Cl. 1, 8 (1996) (describing the phrase as having weight, but not being dispositive).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 This maxim has not been codified into any Guam law.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Nevertheless, this court believes that the maxim applies given the larger context in which telephonic testimony was excluded from Guam}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s testimonial laws.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [10]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a) concludes, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The court may, for good cause shown in compelling circumstances and upon appropriate safeguards, permit presentation of testimony in open court by contemporaneous transmission from a different location.}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In addition, the notes to FRCP 43(a) provide that, }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [c]ontemporaneous transmission of testimony from a different location is permitted only on showing good cause in compelling circumstances.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\scaps\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Fed. R. Civ. P.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 43(a) Advisory Committee Notes.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [11]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab On the contrary, Guam}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s Rule 43(a) only states, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In all trials the testimony of witnesses shall be taken orally in open court, unless otherwise provided by the laws of Guam.}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Additionally, other Guam laws allow for telephonic testimony.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See, e.g.,}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Title 5 GCA 34143(d), (1996) (allowing the use of telephonic testimony during child support holding hearings).}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [12]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Despite modern tendencies to rely upon the Latin phrase sparingly, courts have continued using the idea to the present.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics, Intelligence, and Coordination Unit, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 507 U.S. 163, 168, 113 S. Ct. 1160, 1163 (1993); }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Sullivan v. Hudson, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 490 U.S. 877, 891, 109 S. Ct. 2248, 2257-58 (1988); }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 437 U.S. 153, 188, 98 S. Ct. 2279, 2289 (1978).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In a U.S. Supreme}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Court case which noted the critique of the rule, the Court still applied the rule.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Pauley v. Beth Energy Mines, Inc., }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 501 U.S. 680, 719, 112 S. Ct. 2524, 2546 (1991).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The Court warned that the maxim should not be applied when evidence demonstrates otherwise; but it applied the phrase nevertheless because it could find no contradictory evidence.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id.}{ \insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 After taking all contentions into our analysis, we maintain that the maxim is useful to our examination of Guam}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s testimonial laws.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Because Guam lawmakers modeled the island}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s procedural rules after the federal example, the fact that they did not replicate the federal rule}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s permissive stance with regard to telephonic testimony signifies that our legislators intended to reject this method. The fact that some Guam laws provide for telephonic testimony implies that Guam lawmakers would have included it in the testimonial rules if they truly desired it.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See In re Lares, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 188 F.3d 1166, 1169 (9}{\super\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 th}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Cir. 1999) (applying the maxim to a law in which Idaho legislatures included only three possibilities for homestead immunity).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Any exception to this holding would come from the }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 exceptional circumstances}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 holding in case law, }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 infra.}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [13]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab The }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 expressio }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 rule applies to other ideas in Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s argument.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Mary notes that Guam}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s evidentiar y rules regarding testimony were based upon California}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s original rules which were written before Alexander Graham Bell}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s invention of the telephone.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Therefore, she implies that the omission of the telephone in this law represents nothing more that an historical flaw.}{ \insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 We cannot accept this interesting argument.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Because the telephone has acted as such a major tool in the decades since its invention, we have no doubt that lawmakers would have amended this law decades ago if they truly desired to include the telephone as an acceptable method for testimony.}{ \insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [14]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Robert argues that telephonic testimony in this legal proceeding was improper and prejudicial to his case because Mary could not be shown any documents or exhibits, that the court could not assess her demeanor, and that his counsel was not allowed to properly cross-examine her.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Transcript, vol. I, p. 18 (Bench Trial, Feb. 6, 1998).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In other courts, parties have argued that an individual providing testimony over the telephone cannot be sworn in properly and may be getting coached by a third person unknown to those actually in court.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Michael J. Weber, Annotation,}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Permissibility of Testimony by Telephone in State Trial,}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 85 A.L.R. 4}{\super\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 th}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 476 (1991).}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [15]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Robert would like this court to follow a Montana case with facts similar to those currently before the court.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In }{ \i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Bonamarte, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 a husband appealed a lower court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision to allow his divorcing wife to testify by telephone.}{ \insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Bonamarte, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 866 P.2d at 1133.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The wife, a past domestic abuse victim, requested that she testify over the telephone from New Jersey because she feared her husband, she could not afford to travel to Montana, and she could not afford to pay for their son}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 ' }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s childcare in her absence.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1134.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 She argued that telephonic testimony was harmless error at most.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Although the court understood her reasoning, it nevertheless held that the husband}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s right to confront and cross-examine the witness had been violated.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The court reasoned t hat the wife, concerned about her safety and financial situation, could have been deposed or videotaped her testimony as appropriate alternatives to a live court appearance.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id.}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1136.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 While the court recognized that }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 special or exigent circumstances}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 may allow for such testimony, it acknowledged that this means of witnessing was not to be used in general.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [16]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab We believe that all the conclusions in }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Bonamarte}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 apply to this case.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 While Robert makes no claim that Mary was being coached on the other side of the phone or that the person testifying was not Mary, his right to confront the witness was reduced by Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '} {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s physical absence in court.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Mary maintains that a deposition or a videotaped testimony would have just as many credibility flaws as a simultaneous telephonic testimony.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Though we concur that no testimonial method lacks flaws, we are required to uphold laws as the legislature wrote and intended them.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Bonamarte}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 court sympathized with the appellee, but still ruled that it must uphold the law as it is written.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1135.}{ \insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Similarly, we sympathize with Mary, but our feelings should not alter the boundaries of the law.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [17]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab The }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Bonamarte}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 court did not bar all telephonic testimonies.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Instead, it stipulated that they should be allowed only in }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 special or exigent circumstances.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1136.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In addition, this precedent noted that a testimonial method agreed upon by both parties and the court would be permissible.}{\cs15\super\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12537345 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid12537345 The case at hand does not cause this court to specifically address a situation where the parties stipulate to the use of telephonic testimony. Furthermore, no analysis of exigent circumstances was done due to the fact that the parties did not question the parameters of such an exception. Therefore, the court will not discuss any possible exception to the general rule disallowing the admissibility of telephonic testimony at this time.}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1135; }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 see In Interest of Gust, }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 345 N.W.2d 42, 45 (N.D. 1984), }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 later proceeding }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 392 N.W.2d 824 (N.D. 1986) (disallowing a mental health expert to testify telephonically in a psychiatric commitment matter unless all parties agree to the method).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Typically, other courts that have allowed this type of witnessing did so because of dire safety or legal matters.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See, e.g., Boggess v. State}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 , 783 P.2d 1173 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989) (allowing a minor to testify telephonically in a case involving sexual abuse of a minor); }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Gregg v. Gregg, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 776 P.2d 1041, 1042 (allowing telephonic testimony due to a party}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s late receipt of summons).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In criminal cases, telephonic testimonies are prohibited under the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See Coy v. Iowa, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 487 U.S. 1012, 108 S. Ct. 2798 (1988).}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The tensions between Mary and Robert do not reach the point where this unique legal exception should be granted.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 If the Montana court would not allow telephonic testimony to an abused wife, we cannot find Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s unfortunate situation to be}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 more extraordinary.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [18]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab In her brief, Mary warns that reversing the trial court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision may create a slippery slope in which on-island spouses could tamper with the legal rights of off-island spouses.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 This concern is especially}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 important given the number and transience of military families on this island.}{\cs15\super\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12537345 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid12537345 About one-tenth of this island}{\fs20\insrsid9904948 '}{\fs20\insrsid12537345 s population consists of military personnel and their dependents. In 1996, Guam had a little over 150,000 inhabitants. Of that number, 6,900 were active-duty military personnel. These officers and soldiers had approximately 6,800 dependents. }{ \scaps\fs20\insrsid12537345 Guam Department of Commerce, Guam Annual Economic Review 1996-1997 A35 (1997).}}}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The facts operating in Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s and Robert}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s divorce as well as Guam}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s distance from the continental United States demonstrate why island legislators may want to amend the law to allow for telephonic testimony.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Nevertheless, this method is not included at t his time and the court does not have the power to proceed as it if were.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 B.}{\b\insrsid12518062 }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Student Loan.}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [19]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab We next address the issue of whether the court erred in reimbursing the community for the amount paid on Robert}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s prenuptial student loan. In }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Bliss v. Bliss}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 , 8 98 P.2d 1081, 1084 (Idaho 1995), the court found that reimbursement to the community was improper absent proof of enhancement to the separate property.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 There, the husband incurred a prenuptial debt and used $13,000 in community funds to pay off this separate debt.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1082.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The magistrate at the initial proceeding found that the husband}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s separate estate was enhanced by community funds through the elimination of this separate debt.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1084.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Consequently, the magistrate determined that the community was entitled to reimbursement.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1083.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The Supreme Court of Idaho reversed.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1086.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 It held that although the husband}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s net value may have been enhanced, the community funds did not enhance the value of identifiable property.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1081.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [20]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab We find that the same reasoning should apply to the Rinehart divorce.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Absent proof of the enhancement to Robert}{ \insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s separate property, there should be no reimbursement to the community.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1083.}{ \i\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In the instant case, there was no evidence in the record of such an enhancement.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Therefore,}{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 any reimbursement on these grounds would be improper.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In addition, we note that the }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Bliss }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 court recognized that }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 there may be egregious circum stances of unfair dealing which would result in reimbursement to the community, even if no separate asset was enhanced.}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Id. }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 at 1083. Although Mary contends that there were in fact instances of unfair dealing, sh e makes no claim that these unfair dealings involve Robert}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s paying off his educational debt.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [21]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Based on the foregoing, the lower court erred in its decision to reimburse the community in the amount of $7, 268 as one-half of the amount paid by the community.}{ \insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 C.}{\b\insrsid12518062 }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 FMB Account}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [22]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab When Mary and Robert were wed, Mary put her Farmer}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s & Marketing Bank Account, hereinafter }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 FMB account,}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 in both of their names.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The trial court ruled that this account remains Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 ' }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s separate property.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Rinehart,}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 DM 0761-97 (Super. Ct. Guam March 11, 1998).}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In his motion to appeal, Robert challenged this decision.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The court denied his challenge.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In this current appeal, Robert raises the issue of his dissatisfaction with the trial court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision on the FMB account.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 However, he failed to make an argument on the account in this brief.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 While Mary makes an argument as to why the decision should be affirmed, she also suggests that the mat ter should be considered waived. }{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [23]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab In several cases, we have held that if a party mentions a matter but then fails to make a complete legal argument on the issue, then we will refuse to analyze the matter.}{ \insrsid12518062 }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 See Seafood Grotto v. Leonardi, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 1999 Guam 30, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 13; }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 People v. Quinata, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 1999 Guam 6, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 22-27.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Therefore, we affirm the lower court}{ \insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision on the FMB account because Robert did not adequately present it as an issue before this court. }{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 D.}{\b\insrsid12518062 }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Interest on the Judgment}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [24]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab By way of Mary}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s cross appeal,}{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 we now address the issue of whether, as a matter of law, the trial court had the power or discretion to allow Robert to pay sums set forth in the judgment without interest. }{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [25]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Title 18 GCA }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 47106, (1992) sets forth the rate of interest to be paid on judgments.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In its entirety, it provides:}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 47106. Legal Rate of Interest.}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 The rate of interest upon}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 the loan or forbearance of any money, goods or things in action, or on accounts after demand or}{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 judgment rendered in any court of the territory, shall be six percent (6%) per annum }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 but it shall be competent for the parties to any loan or forbearance of an y money, goods or things in action to contract in writing for a rate of interest not exceeding the rates of interest specified in Title 14 of this Code.}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 18 GCA }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 47106 (emphases added).}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [26]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab The lower court ordered that:}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [i]n full settlement of the community division, Robert will pay over to Mary the sum of $10,893.}{\insrsid12518062 }{ \insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 At Robert}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s option he may structure payment as follows: a) no less than $893 to be paid immediately; b) the balance to be paid in consecutive month ly installments of not less than $250 until paid in full.}{\b\insrsid12518062 }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 No interest shall accrue if payments are timely made}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 .}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }{\i\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Rinehart,}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 DM 0761-97 (Super. Ct. Guam}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 March 11, 1998) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [27]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab Based upon a plain reading of the relevant unambiguous statute the trial court decision to allow installment payments without interest was in error.}{\insrsid12518062 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 III.}{\b\insrsid12518062 }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 CONCLUSION}{\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 [28]}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 \tab In}{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 conclusion, the trial court abused its discretion in allowing Mary to testify over the telephone.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 We find that the lower court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision to reimburse the community in the amount of $7, 268 as one-half of the amount paid by the community was in error.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 We deem the holding on the FMB account affirmed for lack of an argument to the contrary.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Additionally, based upon a plain reading of the relevant unambiguous statute, the trial court}{ \insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision to allow installment payments without interest was also in error.}{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 In accordance with these determinations, the lower court}{\insrsid9904948\charrsid12518062 '}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 s decision is }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 and }{\b\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 REMANDED IN PART}{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 for proceedings consistent with this opinion.}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 PETER C. SIGUENZA\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 JOHN A. MANGLONA \par Associate Justice\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid12518062 }{\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 Designated Justice}{\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12518062 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12518062 {\insrsid12537345\charrsid12518062 BENJAMIN J. F. CRUZ \par Chief Justice \par }}