{\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 \rsid3289728 \rsid5971939\rsid8729981\rsid9508377\rsid11666516}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min3}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy14\hr14\min7}{\version4} {\edmins2}{\nofpages8}{\nofwords3180}{\nofchars18126}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}{\nofcharsws21264}{\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\rsidroot11666516 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid11666516 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid11666516 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid11666516 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid11666516 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery1440\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid11666516\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid11666516 Lujan v. Lujan et al / Hemlani v. Lujan}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 , Opinion\tab Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid11666516 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid8729981 8}}}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 of 15 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid11666516 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-19\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid8729981 {\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\insrsid11666516 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid11666516 \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\pararsid8729981 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\b\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 MARYANN S. LUJAN \par }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Plaintiff}{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 vs. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 DAVID J. LUJAN, P.D. HEMLANI, and ZHONG YE, INC., \par }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Defendants}{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par ______________________________________________________________ \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 P.D. HEMLANI, \par }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Cross-claimant/Appellant}{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 vs. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 DAVID J. LUJAN}{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , \par }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Cross-defendant/Appellee}{\b\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 OPINION}{\b\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Filed: June 16, 2000}{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Cite as: 2000 Guam 21 }{\b\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981\charrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Supreme Court Case No. CVA99-014 \par Superior Court Case No. CV0543-89}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam \par Argued and submitted on November 3, 1999 \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid8729981 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par }{\ul\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Appearing for Cross-claimant/Appellant:}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par Steven A. Zamsky, Esq. \par Zamsky Law Firm \par Suite 501, Bank of Guam Building \par 111 Chalan Santo Papa \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell \par }{\ul\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Appearing for Cross-defendant/Appellee:}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \par David A. Mair, Esq. \par Maria T. Cenzon-Duenas, Esq. \par Mair, Mair, Spade & Thompson, P.C. \par Suite 807, GCIC Building \par 414 West Soledad Avenue \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid8729981 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt \brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\row }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 BEFORE: BENJAMIN J. F. CRUZ, Chief Justice, JOHN A. MANGLONA, and STEVEN S. UNPINGCO, Designated Justices}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 CRUZ, C.J.: \par }{\b\insrsid8729981 \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [1]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab The trial court granted David J. Lujan}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s Motion for a New Trial upon a finding that }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judge Marty Taylor was not qualified to preside at the trial in this matter.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 P.D. Hemlani appealed.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 At issue, are conflicting statutes on the appointment of }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judges.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judge Taylor was appointed pursuant to Guam Public Law 21-03.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 At the time of this appointment, a potentially conflicting statute, Guam Public Law 21-126, was also in effect.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The trial court found that P.L. 21-03 was impliedly repealed by P.L. 21-126, and that under the latter statute Judge Marty Taylor did not meet the qualifications of a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Upon review of this matter, we find no implied repeal of P.L. 21-03 by P.L. 21-126, and that Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s appointment pursuant to P.L. 21-03 was valid.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 However, we also find that, subsequent to Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s appointment, 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6108 (1993) went into effect and repealed both of the aforementioned public laws.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 We hold that pursuant to section 6108 Judge Taylor did not meet the requirements of a }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge and was therefore not qualified to preside in this matter.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 We hereby affirm the trial court}{ \insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s decision on other grounds.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [2]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab This case arose out of a conveyance of community real property without the consent of a spouse.}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 David J. Lujan (hereinafter }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Lujan}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 ) was married to Mary Ann Lujan (hereinafter }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Mary Ann}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 ).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 During the marriage, the couple acquired two (2) lots of real property as community property.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 While still married, Lujan executed a contract to sell these lots to Hemlani.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Thereafter, P.D. Hemlani (hereinafter }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Hemlani}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 ) executed his own contract to sell one of the lots at issue to Zhong Ye, Inc., a Guam corporation.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Lujan subsequently executed a quitclaim deed conveying the lots to Hemlani.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Mary Ann became aware of the transfer of property and, on May 18, 1989, filed her Complaint to Cancel Instrument and to Quiet Title [to] Community}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Real Property against both Lujan and Hemlani.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Mary Ann amended her complaint to include Zhong Ye Inc. as a defendant.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Lujan failed to answer the complaint and Mary Ann took judgment by default against him.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Hemlani, however, answered the complaint and filed a cross-claim against Lujan.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Summary judgments were entered in favor of Mary Ann.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Thereafter, all the Superior Court of Guam judges recused themselves from presiding over the dispute between Hemlani and Lujan.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 On May 11, 1994, the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, pursuant to section 4 of chapter IV of Guam Public Law 21-03 (hereinafter }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 P.L. 21-03"),}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 appointed Judge Marty Taylor to sit as }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judge Taylor was then a member of the judiciary of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (hereinafter }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 CNMI}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 ).}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [3]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab On May 31, 1996, Lujan filed a Motion to Disqualify Judge and Remand Action to the Superior Court for Reassignment (hereinafter }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Motion to Disqualify and Remand for Reassignment}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 ).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 This motion was argued on June 5, 1996 before another Superior Court judge who denied the motion upon a finding that the Supreme Court had not assumed jurisdiction at the time of Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s appointment as }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [4]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab The matter proceeded to trial on June 5 and 6, 1996 before Judge Taylor.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 On April 9, 1997, Judge Taylor issued Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judgment in favor of Hemlani was rendered on May 16, 1997, and entered on the docket on June 2, 1997.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judgment on the remaining issue involving Zhong Ye, Inc. was entered on January 26, 1999 which made the judgment against Lujan a final judgment.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [5]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab On February 5, 1999, Lujan filed a Motion for a New Trial (GRCP 59(a)); or, in the Alternative, for Relief from Judgment (GRCP 60(b)) (hereinafter }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Motion for a New Trial) which was heard by the same Superior Court judge who heard Lujan}{ \insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s prior Motion to Disqualify and Remand for Reassignment.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 In the Motion for a New Trial, and pertinent to this appeal, Lujan asserted that the judgment was null and void because Judge Taylor was not qualified to serve as a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge of the Superior Court of Guam under the laws in force at the time of his}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 appointment and at the time of the trial.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Specifically, Lujan contended that section 6 of Guam Public Law 21-126 (hereinafter }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 P.L. 21-126"), which was in effect at the time of Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s appointment, had superseded P.L. 21-03.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 On April 22, 1999, the trial court reversed its earlier ruling and found that P.L. 21-126 impliedly repealed P.L. 21-03 and that}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judge Taylor was not qualified to serve as a }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge under the requirements of P.L. 21-126.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The trial court set aside Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s decision and granted Lujan}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s Motion for a New Trial.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [6]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab On May 12, 1999, Hemlani appealed the lower court}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s decision to grant the Motion for a New Trial.}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 In response, Lujan filed a cross-appeal in the matter on May 26, 1999.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 On June 9, 1999, following the general rule that an order granting a new trial is int erlocutory and not immediately appealable, this court found that the parties had not satisfactorily demonstrated the grounds for an exception to the aforementioned rule and we dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeal for lack of jurisdiction.}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 On June 11, 1999, Hemlani filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Supreme Court}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s dismissal.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 On June 21, 1999, we granted Hemlani}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s motion after determining that Hemlani had met the requirements of Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 3108(b) (1994) for the appeal of an interlocutory matter.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 DISCUSSION}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [7]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab This court has jurisdiction over this appeal of an order for new trial pursuant to Title 7 GCA }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 25102(d) (1993).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Further, we find that the qualification of a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge is an issue of general importance, the resolution of which will materially advance the termination of litigation.}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Thus, we have jurisdiction pursuant to 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 3108 (b)(1) and (3).}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [8]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab An appeal from an order granting a motion for a new trial, shall be reviewed for abuse of discretion.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Adams v. Duenas, } {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 1998 Guam 15, }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 16. }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 A trial judge abuses his [or] her discretion only when the decision is based on an erroneous conclusion of law or where the record contains no evidence on which the judge could have rationally based the decision.}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Midsea Industrial, Inc. v. HK Engineering, LTD., }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 1998 Guam 14, }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 4 (citation omitted).}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [9]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab The trial court}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s decision to grant a new trial was based on its determin ation that P.L. 21-126 repealed P.L. 21-03 and was the controlling statute when Judge Taylor was appointed judge }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 of the Superior Court on May 11, 1994.}{\insrsid8729981 } {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Further, the trial court found that under P.L. 21-126, Judge Taylor did not meet the requirements of a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge, that his appointment was invalid, that his judgments in this case were void, and that a new trial was necessary.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 In reaching this decision, the trial court acknowledged our decision in }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna v. Superior Court of Guam}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , in which we held that Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6108 (1993) repealed both P.L. 21-03 and P.L. 21-126 when section 6108 became effective on April 21, 1996.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna v. Superior Court of Guam }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 1996 Guam 5, }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 13 and 14 .}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 However, the trial court found that section 6108 had no effect on Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s appointment because the section was not in effect on the date of the appointment and that the proper and legal appointment of a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge is not rendered invalid by passage of a new law changing the requirements for a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 By making this finding, the trial court based its decision upon an erroneous conclusion of law.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [10]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab The t rial court concluded that the provisions of P.L. 21-126 replaced P.L. 21-03 and that the irreconcilable conflict between the two statutes indicated a repeal by implication.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The relevant section of P.L. 21-126 provides:}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Assignment and appointment of temporary judges}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 .}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 If the proper dispatch of the business of the Superior Court so requires, the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court may appoint one (1) or more judges }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 from among active attorney members of the Guam Bar Association in good standing to serve for designated temporary periods in the court under the following conditions: (i) Such judges shall only be appointed on a case-by-case basis as needed to try cases for which full-time judges are not available; and (ii) such judges shall meet all the academic and other qualifications of full-time judges.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The Judicial Council shall establish a schedule of fees to be paid such judges }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 for their services, and the Superior Court is authorized to expend from its current budget the funds necessary to enable the court to utilize such services of such judges }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 .}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Guam Pub. L. 21-126:6 (July 28, 1992) (emphasis in original).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The relevant section of P.L. 21-03 provides:}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of Guam may assign justices of the High Court of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands or judges or justices of courts of record of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in good standing, or a justice or district court judge of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, including a judge of the District Court of Guam or the District Court of the Mariana Islands who is appointed by the President, or a ju d ge or justice from any jurisdiction which extends such privilege to Guam judges, with the consent of the judge or justice so assigned and of the chief judge of Guam whenever such an assignment is necessary for the proper dispatch of the business of the co urt. Such judges and justices shall have all the powers of a judge of the Superior Court of Guam, consistent with the terms of assignment by the Presiding Judge.}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Guam Pub. L. 21-03:IV:4 (April 17, 1991).}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [11]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab Our analysis of whether the latter statute repealed the earlier statute, begins with the rule for statutory repeals by implication.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 While repeals by implication are disfavored, such repeal may be found when a later statute, covers the whole situation of an earlier one and is clearly intended as a substitute.}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna, }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 1996 Guam 5}{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 at} {\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 13 (citations omitted).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Turning to specific provisions of the}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 above-mentioned statut es, P.L. 21-03 authorizes the Presiding Judge to appoint judges from other jurisdictions, including the CNMI, as temporary judges of the Superior Court.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Public Law 21-126 does not expressly exclude the appointment of extra-territorial jurists but expands the authority of the Presiding Judge to appoint temporary judges from the active attorney membership of the Guam Bar Association.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The trial court points to the additional requirements and mandatory language present in P.L. 21-126 which are absent in P.L. 21-03 (}{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 e.g.}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 that appointments are to be on a case-by-case basis, and that temporary judges are to meet the qualifications of full-time judges) to find that the later statute encompassed the earlier.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 However, because repeals by implication are disfavored, these differences are simply not sufficient to justify the trial court}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s conclusion. }{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [12]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab Our decision in }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , that 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6108 impliedly repealed both P.L. 21-03 and P.L. 21-126, is distinguishable.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Most telling is that section 6108 entirely divested the Presiding Judge}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s authority to appoint temporary judges and addressed the appointment of temporary judges by the Chief Justice.}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , 1996 Guam 5 at }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid8729981 13}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 .}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Because the Presiding Judge}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s authority to appoint temporary judges was entirely divested, P.L. 21-03 and P.L. 21-126 were necessarily repealed.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 This certainly was not the effect of P.L. 21-126 on P.L. 21-03. We conclude that P. L. 21-126 did not cover the }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 whole situation}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 of the appointment of temporary judges provided by P.L. 21-03 and did not impliedly repeal it.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 We hold, therefore, that the trial court}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s conclusion of law was erroneous and that the Presiding Judge}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s appointment of Judge Taylor pursuant to P.L. 21-03 was appropriate }{\insrsid8729981 at the time of the appointment. \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [13]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab In his Motion for a New Trial, Lujan argued that section 6108 became effective on April 21, 1996 and after this date, only the Chief Justice could appoint }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judges.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Lujan argued that Judge Taylor was not appointed by the Chief Justice after April 21, 1996, that Judge Taylor was, therefore, without authority or jurisdiction to hear this case, and that any verdict rendered by Judge Taylor was void.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 In response, the trial court found that it did not need to address the issue as it had already held that P.L. 21-126 repealed P.L. 21-03 and Judge Taylor was not qualified.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 However, the trial court went on to state that had Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s appointment been proper}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 the appointment would not be rendered invalid due to passage of a new law or due to a change in requirements for }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judges and that section 6108 would bear no effect.}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 This conclusion is clearly erroneous.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [14]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab In }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , we held that 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6108 repealed by implication both P.L. 21-03 and P.L. 21-126.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna, }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 1996 Guam 5, }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 13.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Section 6108 went into effect on the date the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court assumed office, April 21, 1996.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Id}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 .}{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 at }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 14.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 As of April 21, 1996, the Chief Justice assumed administrative supervision over the entire judicial branch of the government of Guam, including the responsibility to appoint }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judges for the Superior Court.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Id.}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 at }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 11-14. Thus, the requirements for a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge were set by 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6108(a)}{ \cs15\super\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs20\super\insrsid11666516 1}{\insrsid11666516 }{ \fs20\insrsid11666516 We note that after the appointment of Judge Taylor, Guam Public Law 24-139 amended 7 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid11666516 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 6108 and restored the Presiding Judge with the power to appoint }{\i\fs20\insrsid11666516 pro tempore}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 judges. We further note that subsequent to its enactment, P.L. 24-139 was determined to be void by pocket-veto. }{ \i\fs20\insrsid11666516 Pangelinan v. Gutierrez}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 , 2000 Guam 11. However, all references herein to 7 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid11666516 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{ \fs20\insrsid11666516 6108 are to the statute as it existed on June 5, 1996, the date of the trial court}{\fs20\insrsid5971939 '}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 s ruling on Lujan}{\fs20\insrsid5971939 '}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 s Motion to Disqualify Judge and Remand for Reassignment. }}}{\insrsid8729981 which provided: \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 When ther e is no Judge qualified or available to hear a cause or action or hearing in the Superior Court, the Presiding Judge shall request the Chief Justice to appoint a Judge }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 to hear the action.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Such Judge }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 shall meet the same qualificatio ns as a regularly appointed Judge of the Superior Court.}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Therefore, the proper procedure after April 21, 1996 for the appointment of Judge Taylor as a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge of the Superior Court should have been for the Presiding Judge to request the Chief Justice to make the appointment.}{\cs15\super\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar \tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid11666516 }{\fs20\insrsid11666516 \tab }{\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid11666516 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid11666516 We note that Judge Taylor would not have qualified for appointment because he did not meet the qualifications of a regular judg e of the Superior Court as per section 6108(a). Under this section, the qualifications of a judge are set forth in Title 7 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid11666516 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{ \fs20\insrsid11666516 3109(c) (1994), which requires that a judge of the Superior Court must be a bona f ide resident of Guam for five years and have actively practiced law in Guam for seven years. While it is possible for a judge of the CNMI to serve as a judge of the Superior Court, the CNMI judge must first be appointed designated justice of the Guam Sup reme Court by the Governor pursuant to Title 7 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid11666516 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 3103(b) (1994) and then be directed by the Chief Justice to sit as designated judge of the Superior Court pursuant to section 3103(g).}}}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 We find that on or after April 21, 1996,}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judge Taylor was not appointed }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge by the Chief Justice and that any actions taken by Judge Taylor after this date in this case are void and without effect.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 See e.g.}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Toby v. Superior Court of Los Angeles}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , 47 P.2d 338 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1935) (holding a temporary judge}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s acts are void when such judge is without statutory authority to preside).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 On this basis, we hold that a new trial is necessary and affirm the trial court}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s decision to grant a new trial.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [15]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab We note Hemlani}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s argument that Lujan waived any objection to Judge Taylor presiding over this case.}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Hemlani argues that our holding in }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna,}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 that the disqualification of a judge is a jurisdictional defect whi ch cannot be waived, should not apply in civil cases. }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna,}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 1996 Guam 5 at }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 In }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna, }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 the underlying matter concerned the qualifications of an appointed }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge to preside over a criminal matter.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Id.}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 at }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 1 and 2.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Here, the underlying matter is civil in nature.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Hemlani states that the }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 decision rested on the Texas case of }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Lee v. Texas,}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 555 S.W. 2d 121 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977).}{ \i\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Hemlani contends that }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Lee }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 was modified by the Texas Supreme Court in }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Buckholts Independent School District v. Glaser}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , 632 S.W.2d 146 (Tex. 1982).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Specifically, Hemlani states that }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Buckholts}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 stands for the proposition that a judge}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s disqualification is jurisdictional only if founded on constitutional grounds. Hemlani}{ \insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s reliance on }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Buckholts}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 is misplaced.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 In }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Buckholts}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , a trial judge failed to recuse himself from a challenge to a school bond election and the court found that this failure was not fundamental error.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Id.}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 at 148.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The court explained that the statute requiring the judge to recuse himself because he resided in the county of the contested election also contained a provision requiring the presiding judge to assign a judge to hear the motion to recuse.}{ \insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Id.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The court further stated that the mention of motions to recuse in the statute showed that the legislature did not intend a disqualification that would make all actions void.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Id.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The court found that the correct procedure was for the appellants to file a motion to recuse and that their failure to do so amounted to a waiver of any error by the trial judge.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Id.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Thus, the requirement of filing of a motion to recuse meant that the disqualification of the judge in }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Buckholt}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s was not a jurisdictional question and Hemlani}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s interpretation of}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Buckholts}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 is wrong.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The issue in Hemlani}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s appeal is dissimilar and }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Buckholt}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 is inapplicable.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 In this appeal, the ultimate question is whether the appointment of Judge Taylor was valid.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 This question is jurisdictional and under }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Topasna}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 can be raised at any time.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Therefore, Hemlani}{ \insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s argument that Lujan somehow waived any objection to Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s qualification is meritless.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Lujan previously raised the issue in his Motion to Disqualify.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The issue was preserved and raised again in the post-trial motion.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [16]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab We also note Hemlani}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s argument that Lujan}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s Motion for a New Trial should not have been heard by the trial court.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Hemlani states that the applicable statute in challenging the qualifications of a judge is Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6107 (1993).}{\cs15\super\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 { \cs15\super\insrsid11666516 \chftn }{\b\insrsid11666516 }{\fs20\insrsid11666516 Section 6107 provides: \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\b\fs20\insrsid11666516 \par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\b\fs20\insrsid11666516 Objection to competency; procedure.}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 Whenever a Justice or Judge who shall be disqualified under the provisions of this Chapter to sit or act as such in any action or proceeding pending before him or her neglects or fails to declare his or her disqualification in the manner p rovided by this Chapter, any party to such action or proceeding who has appeared therein may present to the court and file with the clerk a written statement objecting to the hearing of such matter or any trial of any issue of fact or law in such action o r proceeding before such Justice or Judge, and setting forth the fact or facts constituting the ground of the disqualification of such Justice or Judge. . . . \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid11666516 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid11666516 7 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid11666516 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid11666516 6107.}}}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Hemlani claims that Lujan based his unsuccessful Motion to Disqualify and Remand for Reassignment on section 6107.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Hemlani argues that Lujan, having lost this Motion to Disqualify and Remand for Reassignment, should have raised the issue of Judge Taylor}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s qualifications in an appeal and not in the Motion for a New Trial, which is the subject of the instant appeal.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [17]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab Hemlani}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s argument is without merit.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Upon review of Lujan}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s Motion to Disqualify and Remand for Reassignment, we find that it was based on the argument that Judge Taylor was not legally appointed pursuant to 7 GCA }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6108 and 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 3103 (b) and (g).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The Motion to Disqualify was not based on the grounds for disqualification s et forth in Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6105 (1993) (disqualification for conflicts of interest) and was, therefore, not based on 7 GCA }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6107.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 This motion was denied by the same trial court which held that sections 6108 and 3103 had not yet gone into effect}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 because the Supreme Court had not assumed jurisdiction.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The trial court}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s holding was in error.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The Supreme Court}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s jurisdiction went into effect on April 21, 1996 which was p rior to the hearing on the motion to Disqualify Judge and prior to the trial on the merits.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Had the trial court properly found that the Supreme Court had assumed jurisdiction at that time, the trial court would have reached a different decision on this motion.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }{\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [18]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab Finally, we note that the order appointing Judge Taylor to this case specified that the appointment was to expire upon the final disposition of this case.}{\insrsid8729981 } {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 This is contrary to the very reason for the appointment of a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge and raises the possibility that a temporary judge could sit }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 ad infinitum}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 considering the uncertain duration certain trials could take.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 An indefinitely appointed or continually reappointed judge pro tempore is a contradiction in terms.}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid8729981 }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Application of Eng}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 , 776 P.2d 1336, 1344 (Wash. 1989).}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Following this reasoning, the appointment of a }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge is to }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 temporarily}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 fill a vacancy on the bench created by the absence or disqualification of any existing judge.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Presumably, when vacant bench positions are filled and a permanent full-time judge with no conflicts becomes available, the need for a temporary judge is obviated and the case should be reassigned to the new permanent judge.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Guam public policy should be that }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judge appointments are made when such assignments are necessary for the proper dispatch of the court}{ \insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s business.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 If such an assignment becomes unnecessary, the appointment should expire.}{\insrsid8729981 }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Lujan}{\insrsid5971939\charrsid8729981 '}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 s pretrial Motion to Disqualify and Remand for Reassignment was the proper motion to address and accomplish this policy.}{\insrsid8729981 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 CONCLUSION}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 [19]}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 \tab }{\i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judge Marty Taylor was properly appointed by the Presiding Judge pursuant to P.L. 21-03.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 However, when the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court assumed office on April 21, 1996, 7 GCA }{ \insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 6108 went into effect and set the requirements for the appointment of }{ \i\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 pro tempore}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 judges.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Judge Taylor did not meet the requirements of section 6107, and after April 21, 1996, was no longer qualified to preside in this matter.}{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 The Decision and Order granting a new trial is hereby }{ \b\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 AFFIRMED}{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 .}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 JOHN A. MANGLONA\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 STEVEN S. UNPINGCO \par Designated Justice\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid8729981 }{\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 Designated Justice}{\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid8729981 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8729981 {\insrsid11666516\charrsid8729981 BENJAMIN J. F. CRUZ \par Chief Justice \par }}