Zaji Zajradhara
ATTORNEY Mark Scoggins, who represents Northern Marianas College, has asked the CNMI Supreme Court to sanction Zaji Zajradhara with jail time as a deterrent for his “open contempt.”
Scoggins said the high court should issue an order requiring Zajradhara to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for open contempt of the court, and why he should not be sanctioned for his “frivolous” appeal.
“Mr. Zajradhara proclaims that accountability is coming, a reference to his delusional belief that President Trump is about to swoop in and make his life all better. NMC counters that accountability should be coming for Mr. Zajradhara’s open contempt, and frivolous and abusive practices,” Scoggins said.
Further, “because Mr. Zajradhara is indigent, NMC asks the court to impose any sanction in the form of a period of jail time. Such is likely the only effective way to deter Mr. Zajradhara’s open contempt,” the lawyer added.
Somewhat deficient
Scoggins asked the court to take particular note of Zajradhara’s open contempt toward the court.
“First,” the lawyer added, “Mr. Zajradhara expresses his belief that the judges of the Supreme Court are not competent or somehow deficient stating “#OMG; it’s obvious that these ‘judges’ have and or could — NEVER PRACTICE ON THE MAINLAND OF AMERICA…AND YET, THIS ‘JUDGE’ OVERTLY REFUSES TO REVIEW THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION BEFORE THIS ‘COURT.’ ”
Further, Scoggins said Zajradhara openly accuses the court of corruption, claiming that “this ‘judge’ is trying to either dismiss the case or sanction the pro se filer; as a means or denying the constitutional question at play; such is the sad state of the CNMI; wherein a sitting judge’s son can walk away with 4-5 million dollars in federal funds; and no one bats an eye; because they are all corrupt. No problem, because Accountability is COMING!”
Scoggins said the “contemptuous attitude displayed by Mr. Zajradhara is actually part of the reason that NMC felt compelled to originally file the underlying case. Mr. Zajradhara spends his life harassing people, companies, and institutions. He does so in an attempt to manufacture legal claims so he can try to make money. As part of this pattern and practice, Mr. Zajradhara routinely and falsely accuses those who come up against him of corruption, exactly as he has now done against the Court. NMC did something about this by filing for an injunction.”
Motion denied
Chief Justice Alexandro Castro on Tuesday denied Zajradhara’s motion for temporary stay of proceedings and motion for stay of proceedings.
“Zajradhara has twice moved this court improperly to request relief that is antithetical to his prior assertions to this Court, based on uncertain claims unrelated to this appeal, and supported by non-existent case law,” Chief Justice Castro said in a court order.
“Further motions on this topic will not be entertained and may lead to sanctions,” he added.
Zajradhara appealed the Superior Court’s previous order granting NMC’s request for a preliminary injunction “to restrain, enjoin and prohibit” Zajradhara from communicating with Small Business Development Center employees by any method [and] for any reason.”
Zajradhara was also restrained and prohibited from coming within 500 yards of the SBDC or an SBDC event.
The CNMI SBDC is located at NMC and is partially funded by a cooperative agreement between the U.S. Small Business Administration and the college. The SBDC primarily provides counseling services to small businesses and sponsors events.
NMC sought a temporary restraining order against Zajradhara, who is accused of harassing SBDC employees.
NMC also sued Zajradhara for undetermined damages to be proven at trial.
NMC asked the court for a temporary restraining order and an eventual permanent injunction restraining Zajradhara from communicating with the SBDC or its employees by any method and for any reason.
In his recent motion for clarification of the Supreme Court’s order, Zajradhara requested that the case be “dismissed to the federal court,” saying that his case concerns federal law and is “therefore more appropriately adjudicated in federal court.”
To this request, NMC has no real position, Scoggins said, “except to note again that Mr. Zajradhara takes this step on this date because he is not prepared to file his brief, showing his entire appeal to be frivolous. More importantly, dismissal of this appeal, if it occurs, will not send this case to the District Court as Mr. Zajradhara seems to believe. Instead, the case will merely return to the jurisdiction of the Superior Court,” the lawyer added.
Zajradhara, who is representing himself, likewise objected to the high court’s “repeated threat of sanctions, deeming it retaliatory for attempting to assert my rights…. The threat of sanctions is unduly harsh and creates a chilling effect on his right to present his case fairly before the court.”
In federal court, Zajradhara sued NMC, demanding $100 million in damages.
Zajradhara alleges civil rights violations, denial of access to federally funded programs, public humiliation, mental anguish, pain and suffering, false allegations/slander, attempted false arrest, extortionist threats, and retaliation.
The District Court for the NMI has dismissed Zajradhara’s claims against NMC.
Recently, designated Federal Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood denied Zajradhara’s motion for reconsideration.
