{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f36\fswiss\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 020b0604030504040204}Verdana;} {\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);} {\f532\fswiss\fcharset238\fprq2 Verdana CE;}{\f533\fswiss\fcharset204\fprq2 Verdana Cyr;}{\f535\fswiss\fcharset161\fprq2 Verdana Greek;}{\f536\fswiss\fcharset162\fprq2 Verdana Tur;}{\f539\fswiss\fcharset186\fprq2 Verdana Baltic;} {\f540\fswiss\fcharset163\fprq2 Verdana (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;\red255\green255\blue255;}{\stylesheet{ \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\s1\qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\outlinelevel0\rin0\lin0\itap0 \b\fs32\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext0 heading 1;}{\*\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;}{\s15\qj \fi-360\li360\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin360\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext15 _level11;}{\s16\qj \fi-360\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext16 _level2;}{\s17\qj \fi-360\li1080\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1080\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext17 _level3;}{\s18\qj \fi-360\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext18 _level4;}{\s19\qj \fi-360\li1800\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1800\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext19 _level5;}{\s20\qj \fi-360\li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext20 _level6;}{\s21\qj \fi-360\li2520\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2520\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext21 _level7;}{\s22\qj \fi-360\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext22 _level8;}{\s23\qj \fi-360\li3240\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin3240\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext23 _level9;}{\s24\qj \fi-360\li360\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin360\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext24 _levsl1;}{\s25\qj \fi-360\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext25 _levsl2;}{\s26\qj \fi-360\li1080\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1080\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext26 _levsl3;}{\s27\qj \fi-360\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext27 _levsl4;}{\s28\qj \fi-360\li1800\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1800\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext28 _levsl5;}{\s29\qj \fi-360\li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext29 _levsl6;}{\s30\qj \fi-360\li2520\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2520\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext30 _levsl7;}{\s31\qj \fi-360\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext31 _levsl8;}{\s32\qj \fi-360\li3240\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin3240\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext32 _levsl9;}{\s33\qj \fi-360\li360\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin360\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext33 _levnl1;}{\s34\qj \fi-360\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext34 _levnl2;}{\s35\qj \fi-360\li1080\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1080\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext35 _levnl3;}{\s36\qj \fi-360\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext36 _levnl4;}{\s37\qj \fi-360\li1800\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1800\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext37 _levnl5;}{\s38\qj \fi-360\li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext38 _levnl6;}{\s39\qj \fi-360\li2520\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2520\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext39 _levnl7;}{\s40\qj \fi-360\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext40 _levnl8;}{\s41\qj \fi-360\li3240\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin3240\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext41 _levnl9;}{\*\cs42 \additive Default Para;}{\*\cs43 \additive Footnote Ref;}{\*\cs44 \additive \sbasedon10 Hyperlink;}{\s45\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext45 Footnote Tex;}{\s46\qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar \tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext46 header;}{\s47\qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext47 footer;}{\*\cs48 \additive \sbasedon10 page number;}{\*\cs49 \additive \f36\fs19 documentbod1;}{\s50\qj \fi-390\li1110\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx360\tx1080\tx1800\tx2520\tx3240\tx3960\tx4680\tx5400\tx6120\tx6840\tx7560\tqr\tx8280\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin1110\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext50 _level1;}{\*\cs51 \additive \b \sbasedon10 Strong;}{\* \cs52 \additive \f36\fs14 informationa;}{\*\cs53 \additive documentbody;}{\*\cs54 \additive searchterm;}{\*\cs55 \additive \ul\cf12 FollowedHype;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid475937\rsid858418\rsid4811880\rsid4853547\rsid9715785\rsid11629171\rsid11932175 \rsid12140399\rsid13963726}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6775;}{\info{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author Ann B. Keith}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2006\mo6\dy5\hr9\min29}{\revtim\yr2006\mo6\dy7\hr10\min6}{\version5}{\edmins31}{\nofpages21} {\nofwords9305}{\nofchars53044}{\*\company }{\nofcharsws62225}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440\margt1749\margb1080 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\hyphhotz936\notabind\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\subfontbysize\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3 \jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot9715785 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4811880 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4811880 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4811880 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4811880 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery905\footery1440\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \ql \fi-2880\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx3600\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\insrsid4811880 Abalos v. Cyfred Ltd.}{\insrsid4811880 , Opinion\tab \tab Page \chpgn of }{\field{\*\fldinst {\insrsid4811880 NUMPAGES \\* ARABIC }}{\fldrslt {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid4811880 }}}{\insrsid4811880 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 \par }{\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid4853547 {\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft0\shptop0\shpright0\shpbottom0\shpfhdr0\shpbxmargin\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt0\shpz0\shplid2057 {\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 20}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn lineColor}{\sv 2}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 6096}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 1}} {\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxmargin\dobypara\dodhgt8192\dpline\dpptx0\dppty0\dpptx0\dppty0\dpx0\dpy0\dpxsize0\dpysize0\dplinew9\dplinecor2\dplinecog0\dplinecob0}}} {\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft0\shptop4\shpright9360\shpbottom4\shpfhdr0\shpbxmargin\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt0\shpz1\shplid2058{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 20}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}} {\sp{\sn lineColor}{\sv 2}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 6096}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxmargin\dobypara\dodhgt8193\dpline\dpptx0\dppty0\dpptx9360\dppty0 \dpx0\dpy4\dpxsize9360\dpysize0\dplinew9\dplinecor2\dplinecog0\dplinecob0}}}}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \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\pararsid11932175 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 GERARDO L. ABALOS and MARIEFE M. ABALOS,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par Plaintiffs}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellees, \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 vs.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 CYFRED LTD., ENRIQUE BAZA, JR., ELEANOR B. PEREZ, \line and DOE DEFENDANTS 1}{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 10,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Defendants}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellants. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Supreme Court Case No.:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 CVA04}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 010 \par Superior Court Case No.:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 CV0580}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 02}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 OPINION}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Filed: June 2, 2006}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cite as:}{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 2006 Guam 7}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam \par Argued and submitted on February 14, 2005 \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trgaph115\trleft0\trftsWidth1\trpaddl115\trpaddr115\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4590\clshdrawnil \cellx4590 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4770\clshdrawnil \cellx9360\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\ul\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appearing for the Plaintiffs}{\fs24\ul\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\ul\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellees}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 : \par Wayson Wong,}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Esq.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par Law Offices of Wayson Wong, P.C. \par Ste. 203, 142 Seaton Blvd. \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, GU 96910\line \cell }{\fs24\ul\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appearing for the Defendants}{\fs24\ul\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\ul\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellants}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 : \par Ron Moroni, }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Esq.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par Tarpley & Moroni LLP \par Ste. 402}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Bank of Hawaii Bldg. \par 124 W. Soledad Ave. \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, GU 96910\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trgaph115\trleft0\trftsWidth1\trpaddl115\trpaddr115\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4590\clshdrawnil \cellx4590\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl \brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4770\clshdrawnil \cellx9360\row }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par BEFORE:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 FRANCES M. TYDINGCO}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 GATEWOOD, Presiding Justice;1{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx360\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 1}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 }{\insrsid4811880 Associate Justice Frances M. Tydingco-Gatew ood, as the senior member of the panel, was designated Presiding Justice. Miguel S. Demapan, Chief Justice of the CNMI, sits as Designated Justice.}} ROBERT J. TORRES, JR., Associate Justice; MIGUEL DEMAPAN, Designated Justice. \par \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 TORRES, J}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 .: \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [1]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Defendants}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellants Cyfred Ltd., Enrique Baza, Jr., and Eleanor B. Perez (collectively }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ) appeal from a Superior Court Judgment on Count I of a Verified Complaint for rescission, damages and injunctive relief filed by Plaintiffs}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellees Gerardo L. and Mariefe M. Abalos (}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 the Abaloses}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Judgment provided there was no just reason to delay the entry of a final judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Guam Rules of Civil Procedure and directed that judgment be entered on a previous Decision and O rder granting partial summary judgment in favor of the Abaloses.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court held in its Decision and Order that the Abaloses had an immediate right to rescind the Land Purchase Agreement between themselves and Cyfred, based on Cyfred\rquote s failure to mak e water, power and sewer available as required by the Land Purchase Agreement and Warranty Deed.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court also ruled that the defenses raised by Cyfred, including those defenses available under common law, were not applicable to a claim for rescission made in accordance with 21 GCA \'a7 60314(f) (2005).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Therefore, the Abaloses were entitled to recover from Cyfred the sum of $18,375.60, less $7,000.00, to be deposited with the trial court to pay off a lien in the amount of approximately $2,225.53 and t o secure payment for the costs of restoration which the Abaloses were required to complete, estimated at $4,050.00.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Any amount remaining would then be returned to the Abaloses.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We find no error in the Superior Court\rquote s granting of partial summary judgment on the basis that the Abaloses were entitled to rescission of the contract pursuant to 21 GCA \'a7 60314(f).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We further find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in certifying its Decision and Order in accordance with Rule 54(b).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Accordingly, we affirm.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 I.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [2]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In November 1999, the Abaloses agreed to purchase from Cyfred Lot Number 8 containing 929 square meters in the Gill}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Baza Subdivision located in Yigo, Guam for $42,500.00.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses paid $950.00 as a down payment and Cyfred agreed to finance the balance of the purchase price over 10 years at 12% interest.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 According to allegations made in the Verified Complaint, the subdivision map for the Gill}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Baza Subdivision filed at the Department of Land Management contains this note:}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Mr. Baza and Ms. Perez}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 as owners would be }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 responsible for placement and construction of the SEWER, WATER, FIRE HYDRANTS, POWER and TELEPHONE}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 for the subdivision and }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 that the issuance of a certificate of title based on any sale or transfer}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 of the subdivided land was }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 contingent upon the completion of construction of the above infrastructures (sic). . . }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellant\rquote s Excerpts of Record (}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ), Tab 1 \'b6 10 (Verified Complaint).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Moreover, }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 any co ntract of sale, deed or other similar documents given to any purchaser or transferee shall give notice of this condition.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 1 \'b6 10 (Verified Complaint). The Land Purchase Agreement between the Abaloses and Cyfred did provide that the }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 SELLER agrees to install an EIGHT INCH (8}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ) sewer line and SIX INCH (6}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ) water line on the public utility and access easement fronting the subject property. . .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 1, Ex. A (Land Purchase Agreement).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred conveyed the property to the Abaloses by Warranty Deed in December 1999, and at the same time a Promissory Note and Mortgage were executed in favor of Cyfred for the balance of the purchase price.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 1 (Verified Complaint \'b6 10.)2{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx360\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 2}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 }{\insrsid4811880 The Warranty Deed states in pertinent part that the Grantee acknowledges \'93 water and power (electricity) are immediately available on the premises or within one hundred (100) feet from the premises.\'94 Appellant\rquote s Excerpts of Record (\'93ER\'94) Tab 1 Ex. B (Warranty Deed).}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }}}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [3]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The water, power and sewer lines were not connected to the property when the Warranty Deed was delivered and recorded.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Nonetheless, the Abaloses took possession of the property, built a house and continued to make payments under the promissory note, though many payments were alleged to be late.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses arranged for power to be brought to the property in 2001, for which they were later billed $5,684.17 by the government of Guam. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [4]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In February 2002, the Abaloses\rquote retained counsel, Wayson Wong, wrote to Cyfred\rquote s representative, Francis Gill, demanding rescission of the transaction based on }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 breaches of promise and warranties, pursuant to 21 GCA \'a7 60314[3{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx360\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 3}{\insrsid4811880 Title 21 GCA \'a7 60314 (2005) provides in pertinent part: \par \par }\pard \qj \li360\ri360\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx360\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin360\lin360\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 (f) If the transferor agrees to mak e water or power or sewer available to the property, such shall be stated in the document transferring an interest in the property, and such hookup shall be made available to the property by the transferor within one (1) year or such lesser time as may be agreed upon between transferor and transferee. Failure to make power or water or sewer available to the property within one (1) year or such lesser time as agreed upon will result in the transferee being allowed, at his option, to: \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx360\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 (1) rescind the transaction and recover all money paid, reasonable interest, and reasonable costs and attorney's fees; or \par \par (2) recover from the transferor all amounts required to make the promised utilities available on the property, plus all related costs and reasonable attorney's fees. \par }\pard \qj \li360\ri360\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx360\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin360\lin360\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 \par Failure to put the promise to make a utility available in the document transferring an interest in the property shall not be a defense raised by the transferor.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }}] and other laws.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 1, Ex. C (Letter of Feb. 5, 2002).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses also requested payment of $33,199.12, which represented the total amount of:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 (i) their $900.00 down payment; (ii) the $800.00 in escro w charges; (iii) the 26 monthly mortgage payments in the monthly amount of $596.12; (iv) the $15,000.00 in house construction costs; and (v) $1,000.00 in attorney fees and costs.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In exchange for this payment, the Abaloses offered to quitclaim the property back to Cyfred.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Receiving no reply, Mr. Wong wrote again seeking a response.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 never responded to the letters.}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [5]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Later that month, Cyfred issued a Notice of Default, Demand for Payment and Election to Sell advising the Abaloses that because of a breach of their obligations under the mortgage, a private sale of the lot would be conducted.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses\rquote attorney wrote to Gill again in March 2002, this time requesting payment of $34,699.12 for damages, increased attorneys fees and costs upon receipt of which the Abaloses would quitclaim the property back to Cyfred.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses also alleged a violation of the Deceptive Trade Practices}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Consumer Protection Act, codified in Chapter 32 of Title 5 of the Guam Code Annotated, and in an effort to comply with the prerequisite to filing a suit seeking damages under this chapter, the Abaloses gave thirty days written notice of their specific complaints and the amount of actual damages and expenses, including attorney fees. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [6]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 More than thirty days later, the Abaloses filed the complaint.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Count One of the Complaint was for rescission of the purchase transaction pursuant to 21 GCA \'a7 60314 and recovery of damages, costs and attorneys fees.4{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx360\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 4}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 }{\insrsid4811880 In Counts Two and Three, the Abaloses sought damages for false st atements and deceptive practices in violation of the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Law, codified in Chapter 32 of 5 GCA, and sought to enjoin the foreclosure of their mortgage to Cyfred. Counts Four and Five of the Abaloses\rquote complaint brought causes of action against the original owners of the un-subdivided land in Yigo, Enrique Baza Jr. and Eleanor B. Perez. Counts Two, Three, Four and Five have not been resolved and are not on appeal before this court.}}}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred answered and counterclaimed, for the amounts owed on the promissory note, and for foreclosure of the mortgage. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [7]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses then brought a motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of whether they were entitled to a rescission of the transaction pursuant to 21 GCA \'a7 60314 and recovery of the monies paid for the lot together with reasonable costs and attorney fees. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [8]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 After a hearing, the trial court granted the motion for partial summary judgment.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court held that the Abaloses were entitled to rescind under 21 GCA \'a7 60314(f) and the common law defenses raised by Cyfred were }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 not applicable to claims arising under [section] 60314(f) because the purpose of the statute was to provide an immediate remedy to people in the same position as the [Abaloses].}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 8 (Decision and Order).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court ordered that the Abaloses could recover $18,375.605{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx360\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 5}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 }{\insrsid4811880 The amount initially claimed by the Abaloses as installment payments for the property was $17,199.12 but the payment history attached to the declaration of Bobbie Jo Reyes, office manager for Cyfred, filed in opposition to the motion for summary judgment showed the installment payments made were actually $16,675.60. The Abaloses agreed this latter amount was correct, which when added to the $900.00 down payment and the $800.00 in escrow charges, constituted the $18,735.60 ordered paid.}} less $7,000.00 to be deposited with the court to pay off a lien estimated at $2,225.53 and, to secure payment for the costs of restoration, estimated at $4,050.00.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses were responsible for completing the restoration and any remaining balance after all expenses were paid from the deposit would be returned to them.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses were also entitled to recover reasonable attorneys fees and costs. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [9]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Shortly thereafter Cyfred filed a Motion for Clarification of Decision and Order indicating their intent to appeal the Decision and Order and requesting a determi nation that the Decision and Order granting partial summary judgment was not an enforceable judgment in the absence of a Rule 54(b) certification and entry of judgment pursuant to Rule 58.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses opposed the motion believing that, while the Decision and Order should be reduced to a judgment under Rule 58, there was no requirement that the partial summary judgment be certified pursuant to Rule 54(b) in order to be enforceable.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court did not initially rule on the motion for clarification but did issue a separate Partial Summary Judgment. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [10]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Approximately one year later, Cyfred filed a Motion to Dismiss Counts One, Four and Five of the Verified Complaint on the basis that 21 GCA \'a7 60314 applied only to unregistered land, and the property purchased by the Abaloses was registered land.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial judge did not rule on the Motion to Dismiss.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Instead, referencing the previously filed Motion for Clarification of Decision and Order, he acknowledged that the trial court did not resolve all the cl aims pending in the action when it only granted partial summary judgment on Count One of the Abaloses\rquote Verified Complaint.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 54(b), the court found there was no just reason to delay the entry of a final judgment and directed final judgment be entered on Count One of the Abaloses complaint.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred filed this appeal of the grant of the partial summary judgment and of the Rule 54(b) certification. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 II.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [11]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab We have jurisdiction over this appeal from a final judgment pursuant to 48 U.S.C. \'a7 1424}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 1(a)(2) (Westlaw through Pub. L. 109}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 2 (2005)), and 7 GCA}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \'a7\'a7 3107(b) and 3108(b) (2005).} {\fs24\insrsid11629171\charrsid11932175 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 III. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [12]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab A trial court\rquote s decision granting summary judgment is renewed }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 de novo}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 .}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Nat\rquote l Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Guam Hous. & Urban Renewal Auth.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2003 Guam 19 \'b6\'b6 12}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 13;}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Bank of Guam v. Flores,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 2004 Guam 25 \'b6 7. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [13]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab A trial court's Rule 54(b) certification as to one or more but fewer than all claims is to be upheld absent abuse of discretion. }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Guam Hous. & Urban Renewal Auth v. Pacific Security Enter. Corp.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2004 Guam 22 \'b6 19 (citing }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Davis v. Fendler}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 650 F.2d 1154 (9th Cir. 1981)). The }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 issuance of a Rule 54(b) order is a fairly routine act that is reversed only in the rarest instances.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id., }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 (quoting }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 James v. Price Stern Sloan, Inc.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 283 F.3d 1064, 1068 n.6 (9th Cir. 2002)). \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [14]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We review for an abuse of discretion the [trial] court's equitable orders. The [trial] court abuses its discretion when its equitable decision is based on an error of law or a clearly erroneous factual finding,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 United States v. State of Wash.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 157 F.3d 630, 64 (9th Cir. 1998) (citing }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Foster v. Skinner,} {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 70 F.3d 1084, 1087 (9th Cir.1995)). \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [15]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab This court is also being asked to interpret whether the statutory right to rescind for failure of the transferor of real property to disclose if utilities are available, applies to registered land.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The interpretation of a statute is reviewed }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 de novo}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Blas v. Customs & Quarantine Agency}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2000 Guam 12 \'b612; }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Carlson v. Guam Tel. Auth.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2002 Guam 15 \'b6 16.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Similarly, how a rescission can be effected is an interpretation of law and is therefore reviewed }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 de novo.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 IV. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [16]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred argues on appeal that the trial court erred when it granted partial summary judgment on Count One of the Abaloses\rquote Verified Complaint because there were genuine issues of material fact that precluded the grant of partial summary judgment, and 21 GCA \'a7 60314 is applicable only to unregistered land.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred also maintains that the trial court\rquote s entry of a final judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b) only as to Count One of the Verified Complaint was not proper as the requirements of Rule 54(b) were not met. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 A.\tab Grant of Partial Summary Judgment \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 1.\tab Applicability of 21 GCA \'a7 60314 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [17]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred initially maintains that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the requirement of 21 GCA \'a7 60314 to inform of the availability of ut ilities is applicable only to unregistered land and the lot in question is registered land.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We must first decide whether to even consider this argument.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses assert that the applicability of the statute to the lot in question was improperly raise d on appeal for the first time since Cyfred did not raise it during any part of the proceedings concerning the Abaloses\rquote motion for partial summary judgment and none of the three recognized exceptions to the rule precluding appellate review of newly}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 raised issues apply in this case.6 {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 6}{\insrsid4811880 An appellate court may recognize such exceptions as (1) when review is necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice or to preserve the integrity of the judicial process; (2) when a change in law raises a new issue while an appeal is pending; or (3) when the issue is purely one of law. }{\i\insrsid4811880 Taniguchi-Ruth v. MDI Guam Corp.}{\insrsid4811880 , 2005 Guam 7 \'b6 80 (citing }{\i\insrsid4811880 Dumaliang v. Silan}{\insrsid4811880 , 2000 Guam 24 \'b6 12 n.1).}} \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [18]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The trial court\rquote s Decision and Order granting partial summary judgment in favor of the Abaloses did not address the applicability of section 60314 to registered land.7{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 7}{\insrsid4811880 On August 24, 2005, Plaintiffs-Appellees\rquote counsel Wayson Wong filed a Notice to the Supreme Court of the Superior Court\rquote s Decision and Order Filed on August 23, 2005 Re: Matters Raised on Appeal. In it, counsel notifies this court of an order issued by the trial court on August 23, 2005. Counsel also provided a copy of the Decision and Order. The August 2 3, 2005 Decision and Order was not in the record at the time of this appeal and is therefore not addressed by this Opinion, unless incidentally.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }}}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Nonetheless, Cyfred raised the issue before final judgment was entered, and in any event before the Rule 54(b) certification was granted.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Therefore, while the trial judge never addressed the argument raised by Cyfred with respect to section 60314, Cyfred preserved the issue.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The fact that Cyfred\rquote s argument was raised before judgment dissuades us from deeming it new on appeal.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Even assuming the argument was raised for the first time on appeal, we still have the discretion to address the issue if it is purely one of law.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Dumaliang,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 2004 Guam 24 \'b6 12 n.1.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Whether 21 GCA \'a7 60314 applies to both registered and unregistered land meets this standard.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [19]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Although we have decided to consider Cyfred\rquote s argument that section 60314 does not apply to registered land, we do not find the argument persuasive.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Title 21 GCA \'a7 60311 (2005) found in Article 3 of Chapter 60 of the Guam Code Annotated, }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Land Management,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 states that Article 3 will not be applied to }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 the registration and recording of real property which has been or which may be registered under the provisions of this Title otherwise known as the }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Land Title Registration Act}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The preamble to section 60314, adopted by the Guam Legislature many years after the passage of section 60311, must however be read to require a transferor of both registered and unregistered land to inform a transferee of the availability of utilities, because the preamble specifically includes all property.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Section 60314 states: }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Legislature finds that all buyers and transferees of real property should be aware of the availability of water and power on the land they buy or obtain at the time they purchase or obtain it.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 21 GCA \'a7 60314.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The statute goes on to say that it will apply to all transfers of real property}{ \fs24\insrsid9715785\charrsid11932175 : \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 (a) No document transferring an interest in real property, except for leases of less than one (1) year, shall be recorded until the transferee has signed and acknowledged a statement, which should be included in the document, indicating that the transferee is aware of the availability or non}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 availability of power and water on the transferred property. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par 21 GCA \'a7 60314(a). \par \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [20]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab This law was added by section 14 of Guam Public Law 18}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 40 on July 9, 1986, long after the initial adoption of the Government Code \'a7 13121 (adopted in 1952), which was the predecessor to section 60311 and we follow the guideline of statutory interpreta tion that the more specific governs over the more general.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Perez v. Gutierrez,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 2001 Guam 9 \'b6 19; 20 GCA \'a7 15126 (}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Particular expressions qualify those which are general.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Because the specific language of the statute that the availability of utilities must apply to all real property was enacted later in time, and is absolutely specific, Cyfred \rquote s argument must fail.8{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 8}{\insrsid4811880 As an exhibit to their Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant Cyfred, Ltd.\rquote s Motion to Dismiss, the Abaloses submitted a declaration from Joseph C. Santos, Chief Planner and Deputy Civil Registrar of Titles and Deputy Civil Recorder stating in part that the \'93 Department of Land Management has always required that all real property on Guam, whether registered or unregistered, are subject to the required disclosures as set forth in 21 GCA \'a7 60314.\'94 ER Tab 19 Ex. 2 (Decl. of Joseph C. Santos). The Abaloses contend that the construction of the statute given by Department of Land Management as the implementing agency should be given deference but while the record suggests it is the practice of the Department of Land Management to apply section 60314 to both registered and unregistered land, this practice does not rise to the level of rulemaking so no deference is appropriate. There is, however, a t the same time no reason to disrupt it.}}}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See Guam v. Quinata}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 704 F.2d 1085, 1088(9th Cir. 1983) (}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Where two statutes are in irreconcilable conflict, \lquote the later act to the extent of the conflict constitutes an implied repeal of the earlier act.\rquote }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ) (quoting }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Posadas v. National City Bank,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 296 U.S. 497, 503 (1936)). \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [21]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred\rquote s argument is further undermined by its own failure to comply with the provisions of Guam\rquote s land registration laws.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The protection afforded by the land registration laws is limited: }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 To avail oneself of the protections of the Registration Law, a person must either be an initial registrant or a bona fide purchaser.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Pelowski v. Taitano}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2000 Guam 34 \'b6 34.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 It is inconceivable that the Legislature intended to }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 protect}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 transferors of re gistered land from the requirement of informing transferees of the availability of utilities, but the transfer to the Abaloses has not yet been registered under the Land Registration Law.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The record does not show that Cyfred even received a certificate of title for the property or that the transfer to the Abaloses was done in accordance with 21 GCA \'a7 29149.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 } {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Every transfer of registered land is deemed to be registered under the Land Registration Law }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 when the new certificate to the transferee shall have been marked as in the case of the first registration . . .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 21 GCA \'a7 29133 (2005).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 This was not done here. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [22]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Finally, we take judicial notice of the fact that a significant portion of land on Guam is registered.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Guam. R. Evid. 201.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In light of this, it makes no sense to interpret 21 GCA \'a7 60314 as applying only to transferees of unregistered land.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 There is nothing in the legislative history to suggest that the law requiring notice to all buyers and transferees of real property of the availability o f utilities was meant to apply only to unregistered land, thereby excluding a significant portion of other transferees from the benefits of such disclosures. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 2.\tab Abaloses\rquote option to rescind \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [23]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Having determined that 21 GCA \'a7 60314 applies to the property purchased by the Abaloses, we now evaluate whether the Abaloses are entitled to rescission of the transaction under this statute.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The statute entitles buyers and transferees of real property to be aware of the availability or non}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 availability of water, power, or sewer when property is transferred.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 It also gives a transferee the option to rescind the transaction if the transferor agrees to make water, power or sewer available to the property and fails to do so within one year or such lesser time as agreed.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 21 GCA \'a7 60314(f).}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [24]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred never disputed that it had agreed to provide utilities to the lot, and that such utilities were not provided within one year.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In fact, during the hearing on the Motion for Summary Judgment, counsel for Cyfred stated:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 C yfred concedes that the utilities were not put in there within a year despite their best efforts.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 5, at 2 (Opp\rquote n to Mot. for Summ. J.); Tr. at 12 (Hr\rquote g on Pl.\rquote s Mot. for Partial Summ. J., Nov. 29, 2002).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Therefore, the Abaloses had the option to either rescind the transaction and recover all monies paid, reasonable interest, and reasonable costs and attorney\rquote s fees; or recover from Cyfred all amounts required to make the promised utilities available on the property, plus all related costs and reasonable attorney\rquote s fees.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses opted to sue for rescission and the trial court granted summary judgment on this claim. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [25]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred argues that 20 GCA \'a7 32429{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 9}{\insrsid4811880 Title 20 GCA \'a7 3242 (2005), entitled Rescinding Party to do Equity, states: \'93On adjudgi ng the rescission of a contract, the court may require the party to whom such relief is granted to make any compensation to the other which justice may require.\'94}} and 18 GCA \'a7 8920410{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 10}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 }{\insrsid4811880 Title 18 GCA \'a7 89204 (2005), entitled \'93 How Rescission Effected,\'94 states: \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 Rescission, when not effected by consent, can be accomplished only by the use, on the part of the party rescinding, of reasonable diligence to comply with the following rules: \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 { \insrsid4811880 \par }\pard \qj \li1080\ri1080\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin1080\lin1080\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 1. He must rescind promptly, upon discovering the facts which entitle him to rescind, if he is free from duress, menace, undue influence, or disability, and is aware of his right to rescind; and, \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 { \insrsid4811880 \par }\pard \qj \li1080\ri1080\sa240\nowidctlpar \tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx1800\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin1080\lin1080\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 2. He must restore to the other party everything of value which he has received from him under the contract; or must offer to restore the same, upon condition that such party shall do likewise, unless the latter is unable or positively refuses to do so.}} are applicable to a claim for rescission brought pursuant to 21 GCA \'a7 60314 and further that the Abaloses were not entitled to rescission because they were in default on the underlying contract, they did not act with due diligence in deciding to rescind, and they had not offered to restore Cyfred to the condition Cyfred would have been in but for the contract.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Moreover, what the costs are to restore the property to status quo is a factual issue precluding summary judgment.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses assert that they are not bound by the provisions of 20 GCA \'a7 3242 and 18 GCA \'a7 89204 because these sections deal with an equitable rescission of a contract while 21 GCA \'a7 60314 deals with a statutory rescission of a real estate transaction.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses submit the Legislature did not make the conditions set forth in these other rescission statutes applicable to actions for rescission brought under section 60314 and the omission of such conditions are }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 consistent with the [unique] remedial and penalty nature of that statute.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 7 at 2 (Pls.\rquote Reply Mem. in Supp. of Pl. \rquote s Mot. for Partial Summ. J.).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Even if these sections did apply, the Abaloses contend the trial court was not required to order them to make any compensation under 20 GCA \'a7 3242.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Moreover, the Abaloses insist that they did rescind promptly and were prepared to restore and return the property to Cyfred in essentially the same condition it was sold.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 To support this offer, the Abaloses agreed that if 18 GCA \'a7 89204 applied, the trial court could withhold $7,000.00 from the $18,735.60 paid for the lot which the Abalo ses submitted would be enough to provide for restoration of the property and clearance of all judgments and tax liens. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [26]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The trial court did not specifically rule on the application of the other rescission statutes but held }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 common law defenses are not applicable to claims arising under 21 G.C.A. \'a760314(f) because the purpose of the statute was to provide an immediate remedy to people in the same position as the Plaintiffs.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 8 at 4 (Decision and Order).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court further stated }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [t]o hold otherwise would mean that the buyer is left to the mercy of the seller and render the statutes meaningless,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 and that }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 the breach in this is incredibly critical to the fundamental use of the property as a residential lot.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 8 at 4 (Decision and Order).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In considering the parties\rquote respective arguments and the trial court\rquote s decision that common law defenses are not applicable, it will be beneficial to review the genesis of 20 GCA \'a7 3242 and 18 GCA \'a7 89204. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 3.\tab Effecting a rescission}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 a.\tab rescission }{\b\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 and rescission by equitable decree}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [27]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Title 20 GCA \'a7 3242, formerly Guam Civil Code section 3408, is based on the now}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 repealed California Civil Code section 3408, while 18 GCA \'a7 89204, formerly Guam Civil Code section 1691, is based on section 1691 of the former California Civil Code.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Section 1691 rescission was known as }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 rescission }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 and arises out of a unilateral rescission by one of the parties.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 McCall v. Super. Ct.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 36 P.2d 642, 643 (Cal. 1934).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Section 89204 gives the court the equitable powers to equalize the positions of the parties to the rescission after one of the parties has already effected a rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 On the other hand, section 3242 is known as }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 rescission by equitable decree}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 or }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 rescission by judicial decree}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 whereby a party seeks the court to order a rescission, and make such other orders as the court may find appropriate.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See McCall, }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 36 P.2d. 642;}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Zeller v. Milligan}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 236 P. 349, 351 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1925).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The distinction between a rescission }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 and a rescission by equitable decree is that the former is an action seeking to enforce a rescission that took place outside the courtroom, while the latter is an action seeking a court decree of rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In a rescission }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , the contract no longer exists, it having been terminated by the prior rescission; while in an equitable rescission, the contract continues to exist until set aside by the court\rquote s decree.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 There were substantive and procedural differences between the two distinct methods for obtaining rescissionary relief and the considerable confusion in the law governing rescissions stems in part from the litigants \rquote , and sometimes courts\rquote failure, to recognize this distinction.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Although we have explained the distinction between a rescission }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 and a rescission by equitable decree, we must still decide whether these previously existing rules governing rescission codified in 20 GCA \'a7 3242 or 18 GCA \'a7 89204 may still be applicable to the Abaloses\rquote option to rescind found in 21 GCA \'a7 60314, a subsequently}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 enacted statutory provision. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [28]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab A California appellate court examined a similar issue when it analyzed a subsequently}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 enacted law allowing an insurance company to rescind contracts (section 650 of the California Insurance Code, incorporated into California\rquote s insurance code in 1935 after the enactment of both section 1691 (rescission }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ) and section 3408 (rescission by equitable decree)).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Resure, Inc. v. Superior Court}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 49 Cal. Rptr. 2d 354 (Ct. App. 1996), addressed whether the specialized section on insurance rescission was subject to the California laws regarding rescission }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 or by equitable decree in order to determine the rights of the parties following the rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court examined the history of rescission law in California and confirmed that:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [T]here were significant distinctions between two types of }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 rescission}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 recognized by the courts and the Legislature at the time section 650 was enacted.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 } {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Rescission accomplished by the unilateral act of one of the parties to the contract without the assistance of the court, referred to as }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 rescission in pais,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 was governed by sections 1689 through 1691 of the Civil Code. [citations omitted] \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 * * * \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The other type, accomplished by an action in equity for rescission, was referred to as }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 equitable}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 or }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 judicial}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 rescission and was governed by former sections 3406 through 3408 of the Civil Code. [citation omitted] \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 359. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [29]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The court in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Resure}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 recogniz ed that the requirements of sections 3408 and 1691 remained applicable to later}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 created rights of rescission by statute, stating that }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 section 1691 of the Civil Code, enacted in 1872, and established by common law, already required notice and restoration o r offer to restore benefits prior to rescinding any contract, whether by way of equitable rescission or rescission in pais.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [Section 650] did nothing to alter or enhance these procedures.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 at 360.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We believe the court\rquote s analysis in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Resure}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 is sound, and there is no reason why the existing requirements under Guam\rquote s rescission statute should not apply.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Therefore, the same requirements apply to the Abaloses\rquote right to rescind under}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 21 GCA \'a7 60314, that is, they must comply with the existing requirements of the type of rescission they seek to effectuate. \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [30]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab In this case, the Abaloses are not seeking non}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 judicial (or }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ) rescission, as they did not seek to effectuate their rescission without the assistance of the trial court.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 An }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 rescissio n would have been accomplished by giving notice of the election to rescind and tendering the restoration of any value received by the party seeking to rescind.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cal.Civ. Code \'a7 1691(2) (1933); }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Bennett v. Super. Ct.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 21 P.2d 946, 949 (1933) (}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Plaintiffs by their act extinguished the contract, and there was no occasion to invoke the equity side of the court.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ). \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [31]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Instead, the Abaloses have brought suit in the trial court seeking a decree of rescission and thus, the rescission statute that applies is 20 GCA \'a7 3242.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Because the Abaloses are seeking equitable rescission, there is not the same necessity of tendering to restore status quo prior to restoration.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 With rescission by equitable decree, while there is a }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 general rule that notice and offer to restore benefits has to be given,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 these steps are not required by statute, and }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 the rule [is] subject to numerous exceptions,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 including where without any fault on plaintiff\rquote s part, plaintiff was not able to offer to restore. }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Resure, Inc.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 49 Cal. Rptr. 2d at 359; s}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ee also Zeller}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 236 P. at 353 (stating the exceptions to the general rule requiring notice and offer to restore:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 (1) Where the plaintiff is entitled to retain that which he has received; (2) where the rights of the defendant can be fully protecte d by the decree, or where an accounting is necessary to determine the relative rights of the parties; (3) where, without any fault of the plaintiff, peculiar complications have arisen which make it impossible for plaintiff to offer fall (sic) restoration. }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Accord Stegeman v. Vandeventer}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 135 P.2d 186, 191 (Cal. Ct. App. 1943) (}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Two of these exceptions [to the rule of notice and offer to restore] need be noted here. One of these is where, without fault of the plaintiff, circumstances have arisen that make it impossible to effect a full rescission, and the other is where the rights of the defendant can be fully protected by the decree of a court of equity.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ).11{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 11}{\insrsid4811880 Moreover, there came to be recognition in these California precursor statutes that when \'93noti ce of rescission has not otherwise been given or an offer to restore the benefits received under the contract has not otherwise been made, the service of a pleading in an action or proceeding that seeks relief based on rescission shall be deemed to be suc h notice or offer or both.\'94 Cal. Civ. Code \'a7 1691 (2006) (language added to the i}{\i\insrsid4811880 n pais}{\insrsid4811880 statute in 1961). }} \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [32]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab There is no question that the Abaloses have complied with the requirements of a rescission under 20 GCA \'a73242.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 An offer to restore has not only been made (if by nothing else, by virtue of the filing of the complaint), but has also been ordered by the judge.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 There is no defect in the manner in which the Abaloses have exercised their right to rescind under 20 GCA \'a7 3242. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 b.\tab Common Law Defenses \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [33]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred further argues, however, that there were factual issues regarding the affirmative defenses raised in their answer which preclude the grant of summary judgment on Count One for rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 More specifically, the Abaloses were not entitled to rescind because they did not act with due diligence in deciding to rescind and they were in default on the underlying contract.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Moreover, the costs of restoration of the parties to status quo are a factual issue.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred argues that because the trial judge did not rule on these defenses, summary judgment was inappropriate.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We disagree.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 i.\tab due diligence \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [34]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The judge ruled specifically that the Abaloses did not act with dilatoriness:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 It matters not that Plaintiffs waited approximately two years after Cyfred should have installed the water, power and sewer lines especially since Plaintiffs made numerous requests to have the utilities installed and probably received many assurances that Cyfred was in the process of getting it done.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 8 at}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 4 (Decision and Order).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court did not err here.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Where there are negotiations with, and representations by, the other party which causes the rescinding party to delay giving a notice of rescission, the delay in giving notice is excused.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Williams v. Marshall}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 235 P.2d 372, 379 (Cal. 1951) (15}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 month delay by purchasers in serving notice of rescission held excusable where the parties continued to negotiate from the time the buyer discovered the falsity of the seller's representations until the time he gave the notice).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 A buyer who delays in exercising its right to rescission will not be precluded from exercising its right to rescind; where the seller makes repeated promises but never complies with them, the seller should not be permitted the benefit of their buyer \rquote s delay as a defense:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 A delay in rescinding . . . should not be available as a defense to an action for rescission, for the defaulting party by his belated attempt to comply with the fraudulent representations has momentarily lulled his adversary into inactivity.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Hunt v. L.M. Field, Inc.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 262 P. 730, 731(Cal. 1928).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Therefore, a delay in rescinding a contract on the ground of repeated failed promises is not available to Cyfred as a defense in this action for rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ii.\tab default as a defense \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [35]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab As to the assertion that the Abaloses\rquote default affects their right to rescind under 21 GCA \'a7 60314, it is true that generally, the right to rescind a contract rests only with the party who is without default.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Nelson v. Spence}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 6 Cal. Rptr. 312, 316 (Dist. Ct. App. 1960).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 However, courts have refused to follow this principle in cases, such as this one, where the default by the rescinding party is unrelated to the acts that give rise to the rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In this case, the Abaloses\rquote default is purportedly failure to make timely payments.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred has failed to install utilities on the property.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 If the Abaloses had made timely payments, it would not have affected Cyfred\rquote s ability to bring utilities to the property, as clearly the failure to bring utilities to the property was not directly dependent on the $596.12 that the Abaloses paid every month to Cyfred.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [36]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [W]here the rescinding party\rquote s default is so related to the obligation as to which the other party has failed that it in some manner affects the performance thereof, or the duty of the other party to perform, then the rule [that a defaulting party cannot rescind] is applicable. . . } {\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Eade v. Reich}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 7 P.2d 1043, 1046 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1932).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Where, however, the delinquency of the rescinding party has no relation to the other\rquote s obligation in respect of which the right of rescission is asserted, it will not preclude rescission.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Integrated, Inc. v. Alec Fergusson Elec. Contractors}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 58 Cal. Rptr. 503, 510 (Ct. App. 1967).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Said another way: \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Where the respective obligations upon which each party is in default are dependent and concurrent, the justice and necessity of the rule is obvious.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 So, also, in cases where the rescinding party\rquote s default is so related to the obligation in which the other party has failed that it in some manner affects the performance thereof, or the duty of the other party to perform, the rule is plainly applicable.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 But no case which has been cited applies this rule to a delinquency of the rescinding party which has no relation to the obligation of the other party, in respect of which the right of rescission is claimed, and which does not excuse, prevent, or interfere with his performance of that obligation, or affect or impair his duty to perform it.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 American}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Hawaiian Eng\rquote g & Constr. Co. v. Butler}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 133 P. 280, 288 (Cal. 1913).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In this case, the Complaint was filed in April 2002.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses made eleven payments in 2000, but each payment was assessed a late fee of $50.00, resulting in each payment being applied less and less to their principal and interest.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 6 Ex. A (Decl. in Opp. to Motion for Summ. J.).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 By the time the Abaloses made their twelfth payment in 2001 of $596.12, they had incurred $600 in late fees for the year 2000, in addition to late interest charges.12{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 12}{\insrsid4811880 The payment which was due on December 28, 2000 was made on January 2, 2001, so the Abaloses made every payment due for that year, plus late fees.}}}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses made eleven more monthly payments in 2001, some on time, and some up to 29 days late.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Every month, the Abaloses incurred the late fee of $50, and additional interest.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Again in 2002, the Abaloses made monthly payments, up to the time of rescission.}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [37]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In this case, we cannot say that the Abaloses\rquote performance in making these payments was directly related to Cyfred\rquote s ability to bring utilities to the property.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Therefore, we decline to apply the rule that the Abaloses cannot rescind becau se of their alleged default which did not substantially affect Cyfred\rquote s ability to comply with the terms of the Land Purchase Agreement.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Furthermore, one court has held that a buyer can still rescind despite making late installment payments, if the buyer is induced by a land seller to continue to make payments even when the seller has not held up their end of the bargain.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Kent v. Clark,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 128 P.2d 868, 871 (Cal. 1942).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In fact, the right of rescission is available to a buyer in default.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Graham v. Los Angeles First Nat. Trust & Savings Bank}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 43 P.2d 543 (Cal. 1935), the vendor represented that improvements would be made to property.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court found that the vendor\rquote s representation as to the improvements to the property should have been stated as a belief rather than a fact.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 545.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court held that the representations were fraudulent and allowed the buyer to rescind.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The fact that appellants were in default at the time of the giving of the notice of rescission . . . is . . . immaterial. . . . [T]he rule that a person in default cannot rescind has no application to an action based upon the ground that the contract was induced by fraudulent representations.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 547 (citation omitted).}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [38]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Moreover, Cyfred did not even raise the issue of default until after the Abaloses sought to rescind the contract.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The documents presented by Cyfred do not clearly establish that there is a default in any event.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The purported }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 default}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 does not bear up under scrutiny and is not a defense to this rescission.}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 iii.\tab sufficiency of offer to restore \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [39]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred also contends that the trial court erred in addressing only the amount Cyfred had to pay the Abaloses to effect rescission, but in not otherwise ordering restoration of the }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 status quo}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ante}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred believes that the Abaloses are not entitled to rescission because they are unwilling or unable to restore Cyfred to their former position.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We find this argument unpersuasive because under the rescission at issue in this case, restoration of the }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 status quo ante}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 is not the objective.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [40]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab While motions for summary judgment are reviewed }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 de novo}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , a court\rquote s fashioning of equitable relief is reviewed for abuse of discretion.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 United States v. Wash.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 157 F.3d 630, 642(9th Cir. 1998).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 A [trial] court enjoys broad equitable powers, and its choice of equitable remedies is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Labor/Community Strategy Center v. Los Angeles County Metro. Transp. Auth.,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 263 F.3d 1041, 1048 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Stone v. City and County of San Francisco,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 968 F.2d 850, 861 (9th Cir.1992));}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Kasper v. Board of Election Comm\rquote rs}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 814 F.2d 332, 339 (7th Cir. 1987); s}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ee also Grosz}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Salomon v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co.}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 237 F.3d 1154, 1163(9th Cir. 2001) (}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 When a district court's remedy takes the form of an equitable order, we review that order for an abuse of discretion.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ) (footnote omitted).}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [41]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The trial court therefore had broad authority to do equity in this case, and is given broad discretion in fashioning the conditions of the grant of rescission.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We are guided by the principles found in California courts facing rescission decrees, that equity does not dictate return to the status quo.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Numerous cases are in accord, none more eloquent than }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Arthur v. Graham}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 222 P. 371 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1923), which stated,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [T]he authorities are somewhat numerous to the effect that, where defendant has been guilty of fraudulent acts or conduct which have induced the agreement between him and the plaintiff, courts of equity are not so much concerned with decree ing that defendant receive back the identical property with which he parted in the transaction as they are in declaring that his nefarious practices shall result in no damage to the plaintiff. Persons who attempt to secure profits by deceitful means may n ot confidently [expect]}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 to receive special consideration from courts of equity.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In such a case, as a result of the rescission by the court, nothing is exacted from the plaintiff out of particular regard for the condition of the defendant.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 If his fraudule nt acts have resulted in disastrous financial consequences to himself, it is no one\rquote s fault but his own, and he must sustain the necessary inconveniences thereby entailed (citations omitted).}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 373. This case reflects the strong message that parties who }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 attempt to secure profits by deceitful means may not [necessarily be returned to status quo ante or] confidently [expect] to receive special consideration from courts of equity.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [42]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Similarly in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Lobdell v. Miller}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 250 P.2d 357 (Cal. Dist. Ct. Ap p. 1952), the court states, }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [w]here it is possible to bring about substantial justice by adjusting the equities between the parties, the fact that the }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 status quo}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 cannot be exactly reproduced will not preclude the plaintiffs from equitable relief.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 367.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Furthermore, }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 the powers of a court of equity are so broad as to adequately meet the exigencies of the case and render a decree which will justly determine the rights of the respective parties.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . (citing }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Arthur}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 222 P. 371).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [43]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The California case of }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Utemark v. Samuel}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 257 P.2d 656 (Cal. Ct. App. 1953), echoes this principle.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In that case, the party sought to rescind a land purchase agreement under rescission by equitable decree (California Civil Code section 3408, equivalent to Guam\rquote s section 3242)13{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 13}{\insrsid4811880 The California Legislature has since repealed the two different forms of rescission, the former rescission }{\i\insrsid4811880 in pais }{\insrsid4811880 found in section 1691 and rescission by equitable decree, found in section 3408. This change is discussed in the California case of }{\i\insrsid4811880 Runyan v. Paific Air Industries, Inc.,}{\insrsid4811880 466 P.2d 682 (Cal. 1970), where the California Supreme Court acknowledged that the law formerly recognized two different forms of rescission, but that 1961legislation \'93abolished the action to obtain court resci ssion and left only an action to obtain relief based upon a party effected rescission.\'94 }{\i\insrsid4811880 Id}{\insrsid4811880 . at 689 (quoting }{\i\insrsid4811880 Paularena v. Super. Ct.}{\insrsid4811880 , 42 Cal. Rptr. 366, 370 (1965). This change, notes the }{\i\insrsid4811880 Runyan}{\insrsid4811880 court, reflects the recommendation of the California Law Revision Commission that while \'93 all such actions will be to [e]nforce a rescission, the right of the parties . . . will be determined by the nature of the substantive relief requested and not by the form of the complaint.\'94 }{\i\insrsid4811880 Id}{\insrsid4811880 . at 688. The Law Revision Report also made clear that \'93the court may grant any other relief that is appropriate under the circumstances. . .\'94 }{\i\insrsid4811880 Id}{\insrsid4811880 . While Guam has not consolidated its rescission laws, California principles guide this court in recognizing the flexibility a trial judge has in granting relief has under either of these technical forms of rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 }} , as the Abaloses are doing in this case, because the seller of the land did not live up to his bargain.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 658.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 While the purchaser sought rescission, the seller in response sought a return to status quo. The court noted that the point of rescission by equitable decree was not status quo; }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 it was the plaintiffs, not the defendants, who were entitled to be restored to their former position.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 This is the purpose of rescission. }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 659.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The appellate court used this logic in its conclusion:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Equity is solicitous that the innocent party who rescinds be not made to suffer.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 It exercises no such solicitude for the wrongdoer who has brought about a situation in which one or the other must lose.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In this way, the court noted that sitting as an equity court, the court may }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 adjust the equities between the parties}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 but found that it was }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 error not to allow plaintiffs judgment for the amount found to have been expended by them, since it must be presumed that they acted in good faith.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [44]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab We follow this precedent that restoration of the status quo is not the benchmark by which we measure whether the trial c ourt abused its discretion in granting the equitable remedy of rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court in the Abaloses\rquote case did not err when it ordered rescission without restoring the parties to absolute status quo.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Under the equitable rescission action, the trial court was not as concerned with making Cyfred whole, as it was with declaring that the practice of selling lots with promised utilities and then not delivering the utilities to be }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 nefarious.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Arthur}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 222 P. at 373. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [45]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab We believe the trial court did not abuse its discretion in fashioning the relief ordered.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Decision and Order of the trial court adequately addresses the removal of the structure, the abolition of the lien, and the return of the property, and furthermore, there were no questions of fa ct on these issues which precluded the entry of partial summary judgment on the rescission claim.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court ordered the sale rescinded and the purchase money returned to the Abaloses \endash the court ordered $7,000.00 of the payments to be returned to th e Abaloses to be deposited with the court to pay off the lien and secure the payment for the costs of restoration.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The judge stated:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [Cyfred is] not entitled to what the reasonable value would be of restoring the property.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [Cyfred] is entitled to the }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 restored }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 property.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Tr. at 19 (Pl.\rquote s Mot. for Partial Summ. J., Nov. 29, 2002) (emphasis added).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 There is a difference.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses always agreed to return the land in the condition in which it was found.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial judge simply allowed the rescission under 21 GCA \'a7 60314 to take place, but still held the Abaloses }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 responsible for completing restoration.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 21 at 1 (Judgment).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred argues their estimate for removal of the structure is $20,000.00 and this alone creates a question of fact.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We disagree.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 If the Abaloses\rquote $7,000.00 is insufficient to restore the property to its original condition, then according to the trial judge\rquote s direction that }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [Cyfred] is entitled to restored property}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 and }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 the Abaloses will be responsible for completing the restoration,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 and the Abaloses will have to do whatever is necessary to restore the land.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Tr. at 19 (Pl.\rquote s Mot. for Partial Summ. J., Nov. 29, 2002). \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [46]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab If the $7,000.00 is sufficient to cover the restoration and to pay off the lien, Cyfred would not be able to take the windfall:}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 If [Mr. Abalos] has a valid contractor willing to restore the property for $2000, you\rquote re not going to get anymore than that no matter how many contractors you bring in . . . .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 22 at 19}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 20 (Hr\rquote g on Pls.\rquote Mot. for Partial Summ. J., Nov. 29, 2002).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The remaining balance with the Court after all expenses have been paid will be returned to the [Abaloses].}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 21 at 1 (Judgment).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [47]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab We also do not find persuasive Cyfred\rquote s argument that the trial court erred because }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [t]he judgment does not order the deed or the mortgage cancelled.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellant\rquote s Brief at 36 (July 26, 2004).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Partial Summary Judgment orders partial payment to the Abaloses, consistent with the trial court\rquote s Decision and Order of December 19, 2002.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We find it implicit in the trial court\rquote s ruling that the Abaloses will not retain title to the land and the mortgage will be extinguished once restoration is complete.} {\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We also find it reasonable to expect that the Abaloses will retain possession of the pr operty during restoration so that they could complete the tasks the trial court ordered.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Anything other than this result is absurd.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 } {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 An argument leading to an absurd result will not be adopted.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See People v. Flores}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2004 Guam 18 \'b6 18.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [48]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred also complains that the Judgment }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 does not explain what will happen if the Abaloses do not restore the property, or if the money deposited in the court is insufficient to complete the job, and if the Abaloses squander the rest of the money.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellants\rquote Brief at 36 (July 26, 2002).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 However, the Judgment itself clearly states that the Abaloses }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 will be responsible for completing the}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 restoration.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 21 at 1 (Judgment).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 A judgment is not invalid simply because it does not provide for what will happen if a party does not comply with it. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [49]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Cyfred also argues that the trial court erred in failing to first make the factual determination of rental value of the premises, and then in not ordering that rental value to be paid to Cyfred.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Abaloses counter with the argument that they are entitled to interest on their payments to Cyfred, and this must have gone into the trial court\rquote s consideration when no rent was ordered because it was presumably offset against the interest due the Abaloses.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [50]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab We believe that the trial court correctly did not order the Abaloses to make any rental payments to Cyfred for the time the Abaloses were in possession of the property.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 No rental payments14{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 14}{\insrsid4811880 Our conclusion is buttressed by the fact that the rental value for land that does not conform to Guam subdivision law is not only difficult to ascertain, but morally questionable. The court in }{\i\insrsid4811880 Pugh v. Holmes}{\insrsid4811880 , 405 A.2d 897, 909 (Pa. 1979), noted the irony of requiring a fair market value of property that does not comply with housing B or in this case subdivision B law: \'93 As one author phrased it >it seems questionable whether in asserting damages in this situation cognizance should be taken of a \lquote fair\rquote market value of noncomplying housing such a market could be regarded as an illegal \lquote black market \rquote existing only by violation of law.\'94 }{\i\insrsid4811880 Id.}{\insrsid4811880 at 909 (quoting }{\i\insrsid4811880 Note}{\insrsid4811880 , 84 Harv. L. Rev. 729, 737 (1974)).}} are referenced in the trial court\rquote s Decision and Order, but the trial court also did not award the Abaloses the value of their improvements estimated at $15,000.00 in Mr. Wong\rquote s February 5, 2002 letter, and the court did not allow the Abaloses to recover any interest on the payments made to Cyfred.15{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 { \fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 15}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 }{\insrsid4811880 The Abaloses seek interest from the date of the installment payments, but we note that interest, if granted, would only be proper if calculated from the date of notice of the rescission. This is because interest should be calculated from a date of ascertainment. The law awards interest only from the time money is due, and noth ing was due to the purchaser until notice of rescission was given. }{\i\insrsid4811880 Shirreffs v. Alta Canyada Corp.}{\insrsid4811880 , 48 P.2d 55, 62-63 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1935); }{\i\insrsid4811880 see also}{\insrsid4811880 }{\i\insrsid4811880 Leaf v. Phil Rauch, Inc.}{\insrsid4811880 , 120 Cal. Rptr. 749, 752 (Cal. Ct. App. 1975) (\'93In an action based upon resc ission of a contract, the plaintiff's right to repayment of moneys paid under the contract is fixed by the rescission, and interest on the moneys paid thus is recoverable from the date of rescission.\'94 (citations omitted)). The court in }{ \i\insrsid4811880 Shirreffs}{\insrsid4811880 further stated: \'93The action here instituted by respondents was not based upon any provision of their contract of purchase,\'94 but on rescission, so the date of interest starts on the date of rescission. }{ \i\insrsid4811880 Shirreffs}{\insrsid4811880 , 48 P.2d at 63. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }}}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court\rquote s decision appears equitable.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The powers of this judge sitting in equity are broad, and we will only disturb on a showing that there was an abuse of discretion.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We see none.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [51]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Therefore, the issue whether either 18 GCA \'a7 89204 or 20 GCA \'a7 3242 or any law defenses raised by Cyfred legally precluded the entry of a judgment of rescission is answered in the negative.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Under }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Lobdell, Arthur}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , and }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Utemark}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , the court is not bound by law to restore status quo, but merely to restore equity. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [52]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The trial court in this case has ordered that the property needs to be }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 restored.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Tr. at 19 (Pl.\rquote s Mot. for Partial Summ. J., Nov. 29, 2002).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 More importantly, the trial court held that the Abaloses were entitled to immediate relief.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court did not abuse its discretion in fashioning the relief set forth its Decision and Order and there were no questions of material fact which precluded the entry of partial summary ju}{\fs24\insrsid11932175 dgment on the rescission claim.}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 4.\tab Exclusiveness of rescission as a remedy}{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [53]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Finally, Cyfred argues that the claims for damages by the Abaloses are inconsistent with a claim for relief by rescission, and }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [o]ne cannot rescind for breach of [c]ontract and at the same time recover damages for the breach.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Reply Brief, at 2 (Sept. 8, 2004).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Although the scope of relief available to enforce an out of court (}{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ) rescission were invariably restricted to recovery of the consideration given by the rescinding party and not damages, a variety of cases involving actions in equity to obtain judicial rescission have sustained monetary awards including consequential damages given in conjunction with restitution.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 This was recognized in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Runyan v. Pacific Air Industries}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 466 P.2d 682 (Cal. 1970), where the California Supreme Court noted that an important difference between rescission } {\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in pais}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 (prior California Civil Code section 1691) and judicial rescission (prior California Civil Code section 3408) is that in the case of the latter, consequential damage s were entertained and often awarded.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Runyan}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 said, }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 under pre}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 1961 law in actions in equity to obtain a judicial rescission, monetary awards including those of consequential damages, given in conjunction with restitution, have been sustained in a variety of contexts.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 690.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Runyan}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 court goes on to provide a wide representation of cases interpreting \'a7 3408 to allow for recovery of consequential damages at the same time as rescinding the contract.16{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{ \fs24\super\insrsid4811880 16}{\insrsid4811880 The following are just some of the proliferation of cases cited in }{\i\insrsid4811880 Runyan v. Pacific Air Industries}{\insrsid4811880 , 466 P.2d 682, 690 (Cal. 1970), where the court considered damages along with a prayer for equitable rescission: }{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\i\insrsid4811880 See, e.g.,}{\insrsid4811880 }{\i\insrsid4811880 Kent v. Clark}{\insrsid4811880 , 128 P.2d 868 (Cal. 1942), }{\i\insrsid4811880 Mosher v. Lack}{\insrsid4811880 , 18 1 P. 813 (Cal. 1919); }{\i\insrsid4811880 see also McDonald v. Mission View Homestead Ass\rquote n}{\insrsid4811880 , 51 Cal. 210, 211 (1876); }{\i\insrsid4811880 Shermaster v. Cal.Home Bldg. Loan Co.}{\insrsid4811880 , 181 P. 409 (Cal. 1919). An award for the value of improvements was also available in some cases where the vendee rescinded because of a failure of consideration. (}{\i\insrsid4811880 See, e.g., Barrows v. Harter}{\insrsid4811880 , 130 P. 1050 (Cal. 1913), }{\i\insrsid4811880 Garvey v. Lashells}{\insrsid4811880 , 91 P. 498 (1907), }{\i\insrsid4811880 Fountain v. Semi-Tropic Land & Water Co}{\insrsid4811880 ., 34 P. 497 (Cal. 1893), }{\i\insrsid4811880 Worley v. Nethercott}{ \insrsid4811880 , 27 P. 767 (Cal. 1891); }{\i\insrsid4811880 Gates v. Mac-Lean,}{\insrsid4811880 11 P. 489 (Cal. 1886); }{\i\insrsid4811880 Haynes v. White}{\insrsid4811880 , 55 Cal. 38 (Cal. 1880). }{\i\insrsid4811880 See also Owen v. Pomona Land & Water Co.}{\insrsid4811880 64 P. 253 (Cal 1901). Similarly, the rescinding vendee was entitled to monetary compensation for any payments by him to reduce the amount of a mortgage imposed upon the property by the vendor. }{ \i\insrsid4811880 Arthur v. Graham}{\insrsid4811880 , 222 P. 371 (Cal App. 1923). Where the vendor rescinded, the vendee was liable for the rental value of the land while he had possession. }{\i\insrsid4811880 Austin v. Burns}{\insrsid4811880 , 35 P.2d 142 (Cal. 1934) When a contract for the sale of personal property was rescinded, a }{\i\insrsid4811880 Austin v. Burns,}{\insrsid4811880 rescinding vendor was also entitled to an award f}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 or the reasonable value of the use of the property by the vendee }{\i\insrsid4811880 Vice v. Thacker}{\insrsid4811880 , 180 P.2d 4 (1947); or for its cost of replacement where the specific property could not be returned. }{\i\insrsid4811880 Swan v. Talbot}{\insrsid4811880 , 94 P. 238 (Cal. 1907). }{\i\insrsid4811880 United Motor Etc. Co. v. Callander}{\insrsid4811880 , 157 P. 561 (Cal. 1916). Finally, a monetary award was proper where the court conditioned the decree of rescission u pon a payment by the rescinding party to a third party whose rights were affected by the contract. }{\i\insrsid4811880 Stewart v. Crowley,}{\insrsid4811880 3 P.2d 562 (Cal. 1931).}}}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 \par }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [54]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We have already pointed out that the Abaloses have brought an action for rescission by equitable decree.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Under the facts and circumstances of this case, we believe that the trial court may, in addition to restitution, award money damages or such other relief justice may require.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 } {\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See Bank}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 of America Nat. Trust & Sav. Ass\rquote n v. Greenback}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 219 P.2d 814, 827 ( Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1950).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Additionally, the claims that remain against Cyfred, Counts Two and Three, involve remedies under the Guam Deceptive Trade Practice}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Consumer Protection Act.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See generally}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 5 GCA Chapter 32 (2005).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Count Two is for false statements and damages for such under 5 GCA \'a7 32201, and seeks damages which are not limited to compensatory damages.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Count Two specifically seeks recovery for false, misleading or deceptive trade practices; as the Abaloses had sought damages for emotional distr ess, attorney fees and costs, and treble exemplary or punitive damages for a knowing violation. ER}{\fs24\insrsid12140399\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Tab ER1 (Verified Complaint).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Count Three seeks injunctive relief under 5 GCA \'a7 32119, }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Injunctive Relief,}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 to restrain or prevent violations of the Deceptive Trade Practices}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Consumer Protection Act.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 5 GCA Chapter 32. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [55]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The Guam Legislature has decided that the remedies sought in the Guam Deceptive Trade Practices}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Consumer Protection Act are not exclusive of the remedy of rescission. Section 32105 of this act, entitled }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Remedies Not Exclusive,}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 specifically states that }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [t]he provisions of this chapter are not exclusive.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The remedies specified in this chapter for violation of any section of this chapter or for conduct proscribed by any section of this chapter shall be in addition to any other procedures or remedies for any violation or wrongful conduct provided for in any law.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 5 GCA \'a7 32105 (a).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Moreover, the provisions of the Guam Deceptive Trade Practices}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Consumer Protection Act are to be liberally construed in favor of the consumer.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Section 32108 (a), entitled }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Construction and Application, states:}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Liberal Construction.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 This chapter shall be liberally construed in favor of the consumer . . . .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 5 GCA \'a7 32108(a) (2005).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Further, section 32104 entitled, }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Waivers:}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Public Policy}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 states that a }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 waiver by}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 a}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 consumer of the provisions of this chapter . . . is contrary to public policy and is unenforceable and void.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 5 GCA \'a7 32104 (2005). \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [56]\tab }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Other states have interpreted their own Deceptive Trade Practices Acts as providing non}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 exclusive remedies.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 For instance, in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Nottingham}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 v. General American Commc\rquote n Corp.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 811 F.2d 873, 8 79 (5th Cir. 1987), the court allowed a deceptive trade practices suit to go forward at the same time that the consumer was rescinding the contract.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court recognized that }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Texas courts permit DTPA [Deceptive Trade Practices Act] plaintiffs to recover both damages and rescission of future obligations in order to compensate plaintiffs for the full damages caused by deceptive trade practices.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 879 (citations omitted).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Guam law confirms this, as 5 GCA \'a7 32105(a) provides: }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 If any act or practice p roscribed by this chapter is also the basis for a cause of action in common law or a violation of another statute, the person may assert the common law or statutory cause of action under the procedures and with the remedies applicable thereto.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 5 GCA \'a7 32105(a) (2005).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid12140399\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [57]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The issues presented in Counts Two and Three are not inconsistent with a claim for rescission and the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment on Count One, even though the other claims were pending.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [58]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The trial court correctly ruled that as a matter of law, the Abaloses were entitled to immediately rescind under 21 GCA \'a7 60314.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The delay by the Abaloses in moving to rescind, the late payments on their mortgage to Cyfred, and the sufficiency of their offer to restore d id not constitute sufficient legal defenses to the rescission.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Similarly, the Abaloses\rquote remaining claims for relief are not inconsistent with the trial court\rquote s grant of relief by rescission, but we still must review whether the trial court should have certified the entry of a final judgment as to the rescission when there were other claims for relief presented.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 B.\tab GRCP 54(b) Certification}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [59]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Rule 54(b)17{\footnote \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 17}{\fs24\insrsid4811880 }{\insrsid4811880 Rule 54. Judgments: Costs. \par \tab \tab * * * \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 (b) Judgment Upon Multiple Claims or Involving Multiple P arties. When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but few e r than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay, and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment. In the absence of such determination and direction, any order or other form of decision , however designated, which adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties, shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims or parties, and the order or other form of decision is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties. \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1200\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1080\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\tx10080\tx10800\tx11520\tx12240\tx12960\tx13680\tx14400\tx15120\tx15840\tx16560\tx17280\tx18000\tx18720 \faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid4811880 Guam R. Civ. P. 54. }} allows a trial court to direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties when there is an express determination that there is no just reason for delay, and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 A trial court\rquote s Rule 54(b) certification as to one or more but fewer than all claims is to be upheld absent abuse of discretion.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Guam Hous. and Urban Renewal Auth.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2004 Guam 22 \'b6 19. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [60]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab In deciding if Rule 54(b) certification is proper, we analyze whether }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [t]he trial court . . . properly considered the costs and risks of multiple proceedings and the policy with respect to judicial efficiency and further determined that they were outweighed by the need for an early and separate judgment as to [appellants \rquote ] cross}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 claims.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \'b6 21. \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [61]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The Judgment entered by the trial court }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 fi nds no just reason to delay the entry of a final judgment and directs that judgment [shall] be entered in this matter as to count one of Plaintiff\rquote s complaint.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 ER Tab 21 at 1 (Judgment).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred argues that this statement insufficiently fulfills the requirement of a determination that there is no just reason for delay.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In support of this, Cyfred cites }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Frank Briscoe Co., Inc. v. Morrison}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Knudsen Co.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 776 F.2d. 1414 (9th Cir. 1985), which requires the court to make specific findings setting forth the reasons for its order.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The court in that case stated that }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [a] similarity of legal or factual issues will weigh heavily against entry of judgment under the rule, and in such cases a Rule 54(b) order will be proper only where necessary to avoid a harsh and unju st result, documented by further and specific findings.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 1416.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred states that the remaining counts and counterclaims left to litigate in this case require proof of the same facts as those relevant to the rescission claim and creates a risk of inconsistent results.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Under }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Morrison}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Knudsen}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , Cyfred maintains the trial court\rquote s certification should not be upheld because the trial court did not make specific findings setting forth the reason for its offer.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [62]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab In }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Curtiss}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Wright Corp. v. General El ectric Co.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 446 U.S. 1 (1980), the United States Supreme Court examined what is required for appellate review of a Rule 54(b) certification.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Court stated that in reviewing for abuse of discretion, appellate courts }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 scrutinize the district court's eval uation of such factors as [the] interrelationship of the claims so as to prevent piecemeal appeals in cases which should be reviewed only as single units.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id.}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 at 10.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Ultimately, however, the appellate court must defer to the trial court\rquote s discretion, rather than to re}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 assess the factors that go into the decision: }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [T]he proper role of the court of appeals is not to reweigh the equities or reassess the facts but to make sure that the conclusions derived from those weighings and assessments are juridically sound and supported by the record.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court must initially determine whether the judgment for which certification is sought is final and whether there is any reason for delay.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court in the case }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 sub judice}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 made this determination but the question is the degree to which the reasons for certification must be articulated in the Judgment.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [63]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab While the }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Morrison}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Knudsen}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 case cited by Cyfred required specification of the reasons for}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Rule 54(b) certification, this case authority does not stand as the test under which this court should review the trial court\rquote s Rule 54(b) certification.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Ninth Circuit later modified its holding in }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Morrison}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Knudsen}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , when it stated in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 W.L. Gore & Assoc., Inc. v. Int\rquote l Medical Prosthetics Research Assoc., Inc.,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 975 F.2d 858 (9th Cir. 1992), that the }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Morrison}{ \i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Knudsen}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 requirement to specify any findings and reasons for certifying the appeal was not necessary when }{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [t]he posture of the case and the factors justifying entry of judgment are apparent from the materials}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 in the record before the reviewing court.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 865 (quotation omitted).}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The Ninth Circuit in that case expressly rejected the requirement of articulating the specific Rule 54(b) reasons in the record, relying on an earlier case of }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Alcan Aluminium Corp. v. Carlsberg Financial Corp.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 689 F.2d 815, 817 (9th Cir. 1982), in which the Ninth Circuit stated that }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Morrison}{\i\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Knudsen}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 findings are not required where \lquote the posture of the case is readily obtainable from the briefs and record.\rquote }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 W.L. Gore & Assoc., Inc.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 975 F.2d at 865 (quoting }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Alcan}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 689 F.2d at 817).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [64]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The Ninth Circuit is not alone in its approach; while adhering to the requirement that the proper language must be used, other circuits also allow a more flexible approach in articulating the reasons for the holding.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [65]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [W]e have held that less than technical compliance will suffice when neither party is prejudiced by the lack of formality.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Alexander v. Chicago Park Dist.}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 773 F.2d 850, 855 (7th Cir. 1985) (citations omitted).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [ W]hile the judge did not make a finding of finality in the very words of the rule, he did so in substantial effect, staying the operation of his order for the very purpose of this appeal.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 His intent being so clear, it would be bootless to send it back for a better formulation of the appeal formula.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Republic of Italy v. De Angelis,}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 206 F.2d 121, 132 (2nd Cir. 1953) (Clark, J., concurring).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Texaco, Inc. v. Ponsoldt}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 939 F. 2d 794 (9th Cir. 1991), the Ninth Circuit upheld a Rule 54(b) certification even though the remaining claims would require proof of the same facts involved in the resolved claims.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Id}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . at 798.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [66]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab Thus, not every case strictly requires articulated grounds.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Many cases take a flexible approach to the requirement of findings.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Indeed, some cases require simply that the judge }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 state specifically that he or she has decided that there is no just reason for delay.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Berckeley Inv. Group, Ltd. v. Colkitt}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 259 F.3d 135, 142 n.7 (3rd Cir. 2001) (quotation omitted).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [67]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The trial judge in this case has stated specifically in the Judgment that he has decided that there is no just reason for delay, and although the specific reasons for this finding have not been ar ticulated in the Judgment itself, we choose to adopt the more flexible approach and allow the circumstances of the conclusion to come through the record.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Therefore, while there was no express statement of the specific reasons to avoid further delay, this court concurs with the court in }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Gore}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , and other courts that have rejected a technical approach.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 We hold where a trial court has expressly found that there is no just reason for delay, the reasons for the Rule 54(b) certification may be obtainable from the briefs and the record.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4853547 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [68]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab In this case, the trial judge granted Rule 54(b) certification on the partial summary judgment granting rescission, while all the other counts and counterclaims remained.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred argues that it was error for the trial court to grant Rule 54(b) certification because the counts are inconsistent, stating specifically that }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 awarding both actual damages and restoration of consideration paid are inconsistent remedies.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Appellants\rquote Brief}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 at 19 (July 26, 2004).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Cyfred argues that r escission is mutually exclusive from the remedy of damages under the contract, a general proposition with which this court has no argument.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 However, as discussed }{ \i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 supra}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , the remaining counts of the Abaloses against Cyfred are for remedies provided for in the Guam Deceptive Trade Practices}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 -}{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Consumer Protection Act, which by its very terms are not exclusive. }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 See generally}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 5 GCA Chapter 32.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The rescission count can clearly be enforced separately from the remaining counts and counterclaims, which is a factor th is court has relied on in determining whether Rule 54(b) certification is appropriate.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 DeVera v. Chen}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2006 Guam 1 \'b6 21}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 (holding that whether the judgments can be enforced separately is a factor to be considered); }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 see also Guam Hous. & Urban Renewal Auth.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 2004 Guam 22 \'b6 22.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In addition, this court takes into account that this is to be a bench trial, and there is no danger of inconsistent verdicts.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Further, there were pressing equitable reasons to allow rescission while the other claims remain pending.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Although partial summary judgment has already been granted on the rescission claim, the case was not moving forward quickly, and the Abaloses needed the money previously ordered to be paid by Cyfred to obtain alternative housing.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 This forced a series of filings with the trial court, among them a motion to clarify by Cyfred and resulted, albeit indirectly, in the trial court\rquote s grant of Rule 54(b) certification.18{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\insrsid4811880 \tab }{\fs24\super\insrsid4811880 18}{\insrsid4811880 Rule 54(b) does not prescribe any procedure for obtaining a certificate. Although the normal procedure is to request such certification by motion, a trial court may consider the matter }{\i\insrsid4811880 sua sponte}{\insrsid4811880 . }{ \i\insrsid4811880 Arimizu v. Financial Sec. Ins. Co., Inc.}{\insrsid4811880 , 679 P.2d 627, 633 (Haw. Ct. App. 1984).}} \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4853547 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [69]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab From this analysis, it is clear that there was no just reason for delay, and the trial judge\rquote s certification, which is entitled to a high degree of deference, is supported by the evidence.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 In the words of the Ninth Circuit, }{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 '} {\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [t]he posture of the case and the factors justifying entry of judgment are apparent from the materials before us.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 ' }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 W.L. Gore & Assoc., Inc.}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 , 975 F.2d at 865.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4853547 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [70]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab The trial judge properly considered the costs to the Abaloses of multiple proceedings, the policies with respect to judi cial efficiency and exercised the discretion given to him to grant Rule 54(b) certification.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 There is no compelling reason to disturb his decision.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Moreover, if the trial court failed to properly support its reasons for the determination, the most that t his court would do is dismiss the appeal with leave to seek another appeal should the reasons for the certification be properly laid out by the lower court.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 10 C. Wright, A. Miller & M. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure }{\i\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Civil}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 3d \'a7 2660 (2004).}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 For these reasons, in all respects, it is appropriate to defer to the trial court\rquote s ruling on this issue.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4853547 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4853547 {\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 IV}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 . \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11932175 {\b\fs24\insrsid4853547 \par }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 [71]}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \tab We hold that the trial court did not err in its granting partial summary judgment on the Abaloses\rquote claim to rescind the Land Purchase Agreement between themselves and Cyfred.}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 The trial court also did not abuse its discretion when holding that there was no just reason for delay and therefore in granting certification of its Decision and Order pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Guam Rules of Civil Procedure.}{ \fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 Consequently, we }{\b\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 AFFIRM}{\fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 .}{\fs24\insrsid11932175\charrsid11932175 }{ \fs24\insrsid4811880\charrsid11932175 \par }}