{\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};}{\f172\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f173\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}
{\f175\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f176\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f177\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f178\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}
{\f179\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f180\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 \rsid6244920
\rsid9508377\rsid14954327\rsid16330379}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min4}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy10\hr15\min6}{\version3}{\edmins1}{\nofpages4}{\nofwords1407}{\nofchars8020}
{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}{\nofcharsws9409}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440\margb900 
\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\rsidroot16330379 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid16330379 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid16330379 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid16330379 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid16330379 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery900\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid16330379\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid16330379 
Perez v. Judicial Council}{\fs20\insrsid16330379 \tab Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid16330379 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid14954327 4}}}{\fs20\insrsid16330379  of 6}{\insrsid16330379 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid16330379 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl-19\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid14954327 
{\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}}}}{\insrsid16330379 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid16330379 
\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\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\insrsid14954327 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 EDWARD G. PEREZ,}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par Petitioner,
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 vs.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF GUAM,}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par Respondent.
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 and}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM,}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par Real-Party-in-Interest}{\insrsid14954327 
\par 
\par }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Supreme Court Case No.: WRM02-002}{\insrsid14954327 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 OPINION}{\insrsid14954327 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Filed:}{\b\insrsid14954327  }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 August 23, 2002}{\insrsid14954327 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Cite as:}{\b\insrsid14954327  }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 2002 Guam 12}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Petition for Alternative Writ of Mandate
\par filed March 15, 2002
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam}{\insrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\ul\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Representing the Petitioner:}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par Richard P. Arens, Esq.
\par Cunliffe & Cook, P.C.
\par 210 Archbishop Flores St.
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910}{\insrsid16330379 
\par }{\insrsid14954327\charrsid14954327 
\par }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 BEFORE: PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR., Chief Justice, F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justice, and JOHN A. MANGLONA, Designated Justice.}{\insrsid14954327 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 CARBULLIDO, J.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 :
\par }{\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [1]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab Petitioner Edward G. Perez (}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Perez}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
) filed a Petition for Alternative Writ of Mandate seeking review of a Judicial Council personnel decision against him.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Because Perez has a statutory right to judicial review of a Judicial Council decision, he has an adequate remedy at law.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Thus, Perez is not entitled to an alternative writ of mandate, and his petition is denied.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
However, because the Superior Court Personnel Rules and Regulations do not provide classified judicial employees with a procedure to appeal a Judicial Council
 personnel decision to the Superior Court, Perez shall have thirty days from the filing of this Opinion to file a petition for judicial review in the Superior Court.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 I.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [2]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab Perez, a classified employee of the Superior Court of Guam, was suspended and rep
rimanded by the Administrative Director of the Superior Court for alleged violations of the Superior Court}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 s Code of Conduct for Non-Judicial Employees and Personnel Rules and Regulations.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Perez appealed the disciplinary actions to the Judicial Council (}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Council}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 ).}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 The Council upheld the Administrative Director}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 s actions.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Instead of appealing the Council}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 s decision to the Superior Court, Perez filed a Petition for Alternative Writ of Mandate in this court.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 II.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [3]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab The Supreme Court of Guam has jurisdiction of original proceedings for mandamus.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Title 7 GCA }{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  3107(b) (1994).}{\insrsid16330379 
\par }{\insrsid14954327\charrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [4]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab The issuance of a writ is a drastic remedy and may only be used where there is "not a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy available i
n the ordinary course of law." Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  31203 (1993); }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
see also Topasna v. Superior Court}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 , 1996 Guam 5, }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
 5. The issuance of an alternative}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 writ of mandate lies in the discretion of the court. }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 See}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  }{
\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Gray v. Superior Court}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 , 1999 Guam 26, }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  12.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 III.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 A.\tab Petition for Alternative Writ of Mandate}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [5]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab With all petitions for a writ of mandate, the threshold determination is whether Perez had no adequate remedy at law.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
A review of the Superior Court}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
s Code of Conduct and Personnel Rules and Regulations provisions show that the appeal to the Council was the last administrative step available to Perez in the appeal of his reprimand and suspension.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
The rules do not provide a procedure for a classified employee to seek judicial review of a Council decision.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 However, Guam law provides Judicial Branch classified employees with the right to jud
icial review of a Council decision.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Thus, review by mandamus is inappropriate.
\par }{\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [6]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab The personnel policy for the entire government of Guam is set forth in Chapter 4 of Title 4 Guam Code Annotated.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
For classified employees of the Superior Court, the Council is given authority to adopt personnel rules and hear personnel appeals.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Title 4 GCA }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  4105 (1996).}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Section 4106 provides that the personnel rules adopted by the Council must be consistent with section 4406.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Title 4 GCA }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  4106 (1996).}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Section 4406 states in part:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
The employee within twenty (20) days of effective date of the action, may appeal to the Commission or appropriate entity by filing his written answer to th
e charges against him. . . . The Commission or appropriate entity may sustain, modify or revoke the action taken. }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 The decision of the Commission or appropriate entity shall be final but subject to judicial review}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Title 4 GCA }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  4406 (1996)(emphasis added).}{\insrsid16330379 

\par }{\insrsid14954327\charrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [7]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab Section 4406 expressly provides that Judicial Branch classified employees have the right to seek judicial review of Council personnel decisions.}{\insrsid14954327  }{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Because Perez, as a classified employee, has the right to judicial review, he has an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law, and his Petition must be denied.}{\insrsid14954327  }{
\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 See}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  7 GCA }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  31203; }{
\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 see also Topasna}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 , 1996 Guam 5 at }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  5.
\par }{\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [8]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab However, this court takes notice that the Superior Court Personnel Rules and Regulations fail to provide a procedure for judicial review of Council personnel decision.}{
\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 This deficiency is contrary to the mandates of sections 4105, 4106, and 4406, and is a glaring defect.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Thus, the Council has not afforded Perez his right to judicial review, and we now address this issue.
\par }{\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 B.\tab Judicial Review of Judicial Council Personnel Decisions}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [9]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab Section 7117 of Title 7 of the Guam Code Annotated provides:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 When jurisdiction is by law conferred on a court or judicial officer, all the means necessary to carry it into effect are also 
given; and in the exercise of this jurisdiction, if the course of the proceeding be not specifically pointed out by law or by rules of procedure adopted by the Supreme Court, any suitable process or mode of proceedings may be adopted which may appear most
 conformable to the spirit of this Title.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  7117 (1996).}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Pursuant to this law and because the issue has been brought b
efore this court, we now fashion procedures to correct the deficiency in the Superior Court Personnel Rules and Regulations in order to protect the right of classified judicial employees to seek judicial review of Council personnel decisions.}{
\insrsid14954327  }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 See}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Guam Power Auth. v. Civil Serv. Comm}{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 n.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 , Civ. No. 87-00072A, 1988 WL 242617, at *2 (D. Guam App. Div. Nov. 17, 1988) (}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 In the absence of procedures for a particular course of 
proceeding, the Guam Legislature has enacted a mechanism [Code of Civil Procedure }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
 187, now codified at 7 GCA }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  7117] to allow the Superior Court to proceed where ther
e are no clearly established procedures . . . .}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 ).}{\insrsid14954327  }{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 This court hesitatingly applies the authority granted by 7 GCA }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
 7117.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 The appropriate method for establishing judicial review procedures is by adoption of a formal rule by the Council.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Until such a rule is adopted and so that there is no further confusion on this issue, we hereby establish procedures for seeking judicial review of Council personnel decisions.
\par }{\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [10]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab We
 note two decisions of the District Court Appellate Division which addressed the failure of section 4406 to prescribe the precise judicial proceeding and time limit to seek judicial review of a Civil Service Commission (}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 CSC}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 ) decision.}{\cs15\super\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid16330379 \chftn }{\insrsid16330379   }{\fs20\insrsid16330379 Section 4406 makes no distinction between CSC and Judicial Council decisions.}}}{\insrsid14954327  }{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 In the first of these decisions, }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Guam Power Auth. v. Civil Serv. Comm}{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 n.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
, Civ. No. 87-00072A, 1988 WL 242617 (D. Guam App. Div. Nov. 17, 1988), the Guam Power Authority sought review of a CSC decision by a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief in the Superior Court.}{\insrsid14954327  }{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 The trial court offered GPA an opportunity to amend its complaint to a petition for judicial review.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
GPA declined to amend its complaint and the trial court dismissed the action.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 The Appellate Division upheld the dismissal, noting that }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [s]ince 1952, California courts have consistently held that declaratory relief is not available for review of administrative orders.}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14954327  }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Id.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 at * 2 (citing }{
\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Hostetter v. Alderson}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 , 241 P.2d 230 (Cal. 1952)).}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 The Appellate Div
ision also did not object to the petition for review format, noting that such petition was suggested in an administrative law text and was recognized by a Superior Court judge in a previous case.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Id.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  at *4.}{\insrsid16330379 
\par }{\insrsid14954327\charrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [11]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab In the second case, }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Tyndzik v. Leon Guerrero}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
, Civ. Nos. 92-00023A, 92-00031A, 1992 WL 245889 (D. Guam App. Div. Sept. 11, 1992), the Appellate Division upheld the Superior Court}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 s promulgation of a time limit of thirty days to file a petition for review
 of a CSC decision, noting the absence of a statutory time limit and the authority of the Superior Court to promulgate rules of procedure when none exists.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Id.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
 at *1.
\par }{\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [12]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab While this court is not bound by Appellate Division decisions, we find that the }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Guam Power Authority}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  and }{\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Tyndzik}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  decisions are well-reasoned and supported in law, and we are guided accordingly.}{\insrsid14954327  }{
\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 See People v. Quenga}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 , 1997 Guam 6, }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327  13 n.4.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
We hold that in order to seek judicial review of a Council personnel decision, a classified employee must file a petition for judicial review within thirty days of the Council}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 s decision.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 However, due process prohibits the retroactive application of the thirty-day limit to Perez. }{
\i\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Tyndzik, }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 1992 WL 245889, at *2.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Thus, Perez shall have thirty days from the filing of this Opinion to file a petition for judicial review in the Superior Court.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 IV.}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\b\insrsid14954327 
\par }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 [13]}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 \tab 
Because Perez has a statutory right to judicial review of the Judicial Council decision, he has an adequate remedy at law and his Petition for Alternative Writ of Mandate is }{\b\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 DENIED}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 .
}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 However, because the Superior Court Personnel Rules and R
egulations, promulgated by the Council, fail to provide a procedure for judicial review of a Council personnel decision, this court orders that such judicial review shall be by petition for judicial review which must be filed in the Superior Court within 
thirty days of the Council}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 s decision.}{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 
Because this thirty-day limit cannot be applied retroactively, Perez shall have thirty days from the filing of this Opinion to file a petition for judicial review in the Superior Court.}{\insrsid14954327 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 JOHN A. MANGLONA\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO
\par Designated Justice\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid14954327  }{\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 Associate Justice}{\insrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid14954327 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14954327 {\insrsid16330379\charrsid14954327 PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR.
\par Chief Justice
\par }}