Slider

Mother and daughter ask court to order  John Sablan Pangelinan to put up bond, other security

Local
Typography
  • Smaller Small Medium Big Bigger
  • Default Helvetica Segoe Georgia Times

SECUNDINA Untalan Pangelinan and her daughter Selina Marie Pangelinan have requested the Superior Court to issue an order directing John Sablan Pangelinan to file a bond or provide other security in any form to ensure payment of damages and double costs on appeal.

In a ruling on May 21, 2020, Superior Court Associate Joseph N. Camacho found that John Pangelinan committed the tort of abuse of process in the estate.

The judge said Secundina and Selina Pangelinan have also proven that John S. Pangelinan committed the tort of intentional interference with another’s performance of their own contract by tortiously interfering in the contractual relations between plaintiffs and Peak Development (CNMI) LLC.

On June 11, 2020, John S. Pangelinan appealed the court ruling.

On June 22, Secundina and Selina Pangelinan, through attorney Janet King, filed a motion for damages, cost of litigation and attorney’s fees.

They want John S. Pangelinan to pay them $7.61 million in damages for interfering into the probate of a $3.2 million estate belonging to Secundina’s deceased husband.

King requested the court to issue an order holding John Pangelinan liable to pay $90,281.92 for attorney’s fees and costs; $256,446.85 for damages in the form of investment interest; $798,580.97 for emotional distress; and $2,661,936.58 for punitive damages.

Secundina and Selina Pangelinan also want the court to hold the defendant liable to pay them $3.8 million for tortious interference claim.

On July 9, the plaintiffs filed a motion to compel the defendant to post an appeal bond or other forms of security in such amount as may be necessary to ensure payment of damages and double costs on appeal.

King said John S. Pangelinan has the present financial ability to post a bond or to provide security to ensure payment because he had inherited real properties previously.

King also said that there is a significant risk that John S. Pangelinan would not pay the plaintiffs’ double costs on appeal if he loses his appeal.

King noted the declarations of local court and federal court finding  John Pangelinan a “vexatious litigant.”

Secundina and Selina Pangelinan sued John Pangelinan for “abusing the legal system to extort money from them by interfering in a probate matter despite not being a creditor.”

According to the widow and her daughter’s complaint, Norberto Pangelinan, Secundina’s husband passed away in August 2015. Norberto owned three parcels of land in Tanapag, but before he died, Norberto entered into an agreement to lease the property to Peak Development LLC for 55 years for a total rent of $3.2 million.

Norberto also entered into an agreement to sell his reversionary interest in the Tanapag property to Pedro Kileleman. But before the transactions could close Norberto passed away.

 Secundina Pangelinan initiated a probate for the estate of Norberto so that the lease and sale transaction could be properly completed, but during the probate, John Pangelinan challenged Norberto’s title to the Tanapag property without any evidentiary or legal support.

In his ruling, Judge Camacho found that based on the testimonies and exhibits there was nothing in John Pangelinan’s relationship with the plaintiffs that justified his interference.

 Judge Camacho said John Pangelinan “intentionally” and “improperly” interfered with the performance of the contracts between the plaintiffs and Norberto’s estate with their dealings with Peak Development, which caused the plaintiffs’ performance of the contracts to be more expensive and burdensome.

The judge found John Pangelinan liable to pay plaintiffs for the pecuniary loss that the mother and daughter experienced as a result of John Pangelinan’s interference.

John Pangelinan also “showed his primary desire to cause the plaintiffs to expand legal fees [by submitting] almost five hundred pages of frivolous filings,” the judge said, “all of which the court denied.”

Most importantly, Judge Camacho added, “John knows that his claim in the probate was meritless and that he had no legitimate claim to the Tanapag properties.”

 

 

Shadow
Slider
previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow
Slider

Read more articles

Visit our Facebook Page

previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow
Slider