By Cherrie Anne E. Villahermosa
Variety News Staff

THE Superior Court has granted Coca Cola Beverage Co.’s motion to vacate the Dec. 2003 summary judgment entered against a Palauan firm it sued for nonpayment of debts.
Associate Judge Juan T. Lizama, in an order yesterday, said the only possibility for collecting the debts of Polycarp Basilius’s Blue Line Trading Co. is to vacate the summary judgment.
The case arises out of series of purchases made by Blue Line from Coca Cola which sued the defendant in May 2000 for nonpayment.
Coca Cola later obtained a default judgment against Blue Line.
But the default judgment was later vacated apparently due to defective service, pursuant to a stipulation entered on June 7, 2001.
Basilius filed an answer to the plaintiff’s complaint on Sept. 11, 2001.
Coca Cola filed and served a request for admission to which the defendant did not respond.
On Sept. 30, 2003, Coca Cola filed a motion and notice of motion for summary judgment against the defendant.
Coca Cola separately filed a memorandum and declarations which do not appear to have been sent by the court or received by the defendant.
The defendant did not appear at the Nov. 18, 2003 hearing and filed no opposition.
The Superior Court then granted the plaintiff’s summary judgment on the merits of its arguments in Dec. 2003.
Coca Cola brought action against the defendant in Palau to collect on the grant of summary judgments of the CNMI trial court.
But Blue Line moved to dismiss the Palau action, claiming that the grant of summary judgment was void because the motion for summary judgment had not been properly served on the defendant.
On Sept. 20, 2006, the Palau Supreme Court entered an order dismissing the case.
The statute of limitations in Palau bars Coca Cola from bringing a suit on the debts which are the subject of this action.
Coca Cola then filed a motion in the local trial court to set aside the summary judgment.
Blue Line argued that once the summary judgment was issued it cannot be set aside.
But Lizama ruled that it can still be set aside. He also ordered Coca Cola to re-notice a hearing on the issue of summary judgment and serve the Palauan firm with all necessary documents at its last known address.
Lizama said Coca Cola may then properly serve Blue Line with the original motion for summary judgment and re-notice that motion for a hearing.
According to Lizama, neither party has acted entirely fairly. He said a better solution is to re-open the case and allow for a more fully informed decision.
Lizama said he finds that neither party has clean hands “so each shall bear its own costs.”