By Gina Tabonares
Variety News Staff

THE court battle involving Gill-Baza Subdivision residents and the subdivision owner continues after a number of significant motions filed by both parties have been decided by the court.
Superior Court Judge Anita Sukola issued at least six decisions and orders in the week after the plaintiffs, Kini B. Sananap and the 40 lot owners in the Gill-Baza Subdivision, filed a series of pleas for reconsideration on some of the court’s earlier findings.
At the same time, the defendant, Cyfred Ltd., also asked the court to reconsider its earlier decision ordering the developer to pay the residents some $700,000 for sewer line installation and to pay for the plaintiff’s attorney.
A month after the court made a decision in favor of the Gill-Baza Subdivision lot owners, the developer, through its lawyer, Curtis Van de Veld, filed a counterclaim against the lot owners who had not been paying on their mortgages.
The plaintiff filed a motion for stay, arguing that the court erred when it ruled that at least one year of monthly payments was a condition precedent to the right to a sewer line.
Judge Sukola denied the plaintiff’s request for reconsideration and did not find any basis for an injunction.
The court also granted the defendant’s motion to strike all memoranda and information regarding plaintiff’s Dec. 15, 2006 response.
At the same time, it denied the developer’s motion to amend the amended judgment concerning the attorneys’ fees because the matter was already up on appeal before the Supreme Court.
The lot owners also asked the court to cite Van de Veld for contempt, saying that many motions have been filed by the defendant.
But Judge Sukola ruled that while she agrees with the plaintiff lawyer’s observation, she cannot issue an order of contempt because there is no violation of a court order as grounds for the order.
And because the court has no evidence or proof that there were any foreclosure sales, Judge Sukola denied the lot owners’ motion to issue an order for sanctions against Cyfred Ltd.
The Sananap couple and the other lot owners asked for a recovery of money to build a sewer and water line which were not available when they purchased their land.
Judge Sukola granted the entitlement to the Sananap couple and four other lot owners while reserving her ruling as to the entitlement of the other lot owners who joined the complaint.
The judge ruled that Sananap, Stanley Yantag, Raymond Martin, Anis Sino and Martin Sontag presented evidence that a promise was made to them when they purchased the land.
The remaining lot owners did not present enough evidence to the court to support their claims that there was a breach of promise when they entered into their land purchase agreements.