By Cherrie Anne E. Villahermosa
Variety News Staff

THE Attorney General’s Office has asked for a stay of the enforcement of the Superior Court judgment in connection with the lawsuit filed by Rep. Stanley T. Torres against Gov. Benigno Fitial.
Fitial’s lawyer, Assistant Attorney General R. Anthony Welch, submitted a motion to stay and a memorandum of points and authorities and a reply to Torres’s opposition to their motion to recuse Judge Kenneth Govendo and to amend the judgment issued by Govendo on March 22.
Welch asked the Superior Court for a stay of the enforcement of the judgment pending a decision of the Supreme Court on the appeal of this matter filed on April 20.
The AGO further requested that Govendo be removed from consideration of the defendant’s motion and that another judge be assigned to determine whether Govendo has shown personal bias in the lawsuit and whether he should be disqualified from proceeding with this matter.
The AGO filed a motion requesting that Govendo be recused from presiding over the case and to amend the March 22, order.
The AGO’s motion in reply to Torres’s opposition stated that the motion to recuse was based upon reasonable questioning of the judge’s impartiality.
The AGO stated that given the admissions of Torres, Ind.-Saipan, the government added the additional ground of judicial bias.
The government stated that its motion was incorrectly captioned as a motion to amend judgment.
It said the pleading it filed was a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Civil Rule 60 (b).
Welch stated that Torres made some important admissions in his opposition. Welch stated that Torres expressed his frustration at what he considered to be delaying tactics.
According to Welch. Torres’s opposition partly stated: “Torres gave an ultimatum to Assistant Attorney General Welch on March 14, 2007, to sign or not sign [referring to a draft stipulation and proposed order] and after no response from either the speaker of the House or AAG Welch for another five days. Torres conveyed his frustration to the court and submitted a proposed order for the court to sign.”
Welch stated that by this statement, Torres admitted that he had had communications with the judge and that he conveyed his frustration that the defendant would not sign his proposed settlement order.
Torres goes on to say in his opposition that the judge signed the order given to him by the lawmaker, Welch said.
He added that Torres “made an incredulous conclusion when he concludes in his opposition asserting that the judge has not shown bias toward the defendant and did not commit a manifest injustice in granting the order unilaterally provided to him by Torres.”
Welch said the admissions of Torres and his affidavits filed in this matter “clearly show that Judge Govendo has a personal bias” in favor of the lawmaker.
“They met, they discussed this civil action and the judge accepted the position of Stanley Torres without the benefit of a hearing from the opposing party,” Welch stated in his reply to Torres’s opposition.
“In this litigation, the judge has shown that he has a personal bias in favor of Stanley Torres and against the executive branch of government as represented by the defendant, the governor. The defendant now faces a judgment that has no support in the evidence,” Welch said.
“The defendant moves that all further proceedings in this civil action be stayed pending the resolution of his appeal and that, in any event, this matter be transferred to another judge for a determination of the existence of bias in favor of Stanley Torres by Judge Govendo”
Torres on April 19,submitted his opposition to the defendant’s motion and stated that it is untimely and inaccurate.
According to Torres, Govendo has not shown any bias toward the defendant “and did not commit manifest injustice in granting an order that frankly followed the agreed upon discussions in court and followed the spirit of the settlement.”
Torres said the “defendant has a continuing penchant to frustrate both the plaintiff and this court and should be admonished for its attacking Judge Govendo in an unjustified and spurious manner.”
Govendo’s order dated March 22 stated that the parties had reached agreement.
The order stated that “based upon an earlier admission of a mistake made by the defendant, the governor has agreed to return to Representative Torres’s Legislative Account No. 1745.62840 for Fiscal Year 2006 the sum of $33,872. This represents the 18 percent deduction from…Torres’s FY 2006 budget implemented by Governor Fitial during the last three quarters of FY 2006.”
Govendo’s order stated that each party will be responsible for their own attorney’s fees and expenses.
The government appealed the order on Friday.
Govendo in an order on Monday set the motion hearing for May 4 at 9 a.m..