§ 901. Effect of irregularities.
§ 902. When appeals may be taken.
§ 903. Right of Trust Territory Government to appeal.
§ 904. Review of District and community courts' decisions.
§ 905. Powers of courts on appeal or review.
§ 906. Stay of execution.
§ 907. Decisions of Appellate Division of High Court final until action by U.S. Congress.
Source: TT Code 1966 § 337; TT Code 1970, 6 TTC 351; TT Code 1980, 6 TTC 351.
Source: TT Code 1966 § 198; TT Code 1970, 6 TTC 352; TT Code 1980, 6 TTC 352.
(2) In civil cases, the Government shall have the same right of appeal as private parties.
Source: TT Code 1966 § 198; TT Code 1970, 6 TTC 353; TT Code 1980, 6 TTC 353.
Source: TT Code 1966 § 199; TT Code 1970, 6 TTC 354; TT Code 1980, 6 TTC 354.
Source: TT Code 1966 § 200; TT Code 1970, 6 TTC 355; TT Code 1980, 6 TTC 355.
(2) as otherwise provided by law.
Source: TT Code 1966 § 201; TT Code 1970, 6 TTC 356; TT Code 1980, 6 TTC 356.
Source: TT Code 1966 § 202; TT Code 1970, 6 TTC 357; TT Code 1980, 6 TTC 357.
Cross-reference: The FSM Supreme Court website can be found at http://www.fsmsupremecourt.fm/.
Editor’s note: The following are case annotations dealing with appeals to the FSM Supreme Court Appellate Division that are placed here as reference.
Case annotations:
Cases On Appellate Procedures to the FSM Supreme Court Appellate Division
If the appellate court determines that an appeal is frivolous, it may award just damages and single or double costs to the appellee. Phillip v. Moses, 10 FSM R. 540, 546 (Chk. S. Ct. App. 2002).
Appellees intending to ask for Rule 38 costs and damages because the appeal is frivolous must, although the rule does not require a motion filed separately from the brief, give the appellant more notice than first raising the issue at the end of appellees’ oral argument. Phillip v. Moses, 10 FSM R. 540, 546-47 (Chk. S. Ct. App. 2002).
The determination of whether to award Rule 38 damages is a two step process. First, it must be determined that the appeal was frivolous and second, it must be determined that sanctions are appropriate. FSM Dev. Bank v. Yinug, 12 FSM R. 437, 440 (App. 2004).
An appeal is frivolous when the result is obvious to the court or when the appellant’s arguments are wholly without merit or groundless or when the court has previously ruled on the question on appeal. FSM Dev. Bank v. Yinug, 12 FSM R. 437, 440 (App. 2004).
Rule 38 damages may be awarded when a mandamus petition is frivolous. FSM Dev. Bank v. Yinug, 12 FSM R. 437, 440 (App. 2004).
When the court refused to allow the original petition for a writ of mandamus to be amended and provided that the amended petition would be considered a separate petition involving the same parties, the petitioners’ pursuit of the petition after the order denying amendment did not made the original petition frivolous. FSM Dev. Bank v. Yinug, 12 FSM R. 437, 440 (App. 2004).
Merely being a case of first impression does not automatically make a petition not frivolous. FSM Dev. Bank v. Yinug, 12 FSM R. 437, 440-41 (App. 2004).
Rule 38 sanctions will not be awarded when the petition was not wholly without merit or was frivolous since the constitutional issues relating to a privacy right had not been previously ruled upon. FSM Dev. Bank v. Yinug, 12 FSM R. 437, 441 (App. 2004).
In all cases in which an appellee seeks Rule 38 damages, an appellee shall file a separate written motion at least seven days before the date scheduled for oral argument in order to give the appellant time to respond to the motion. The appellee’s motion gives the appellant the notice it is due, and its opportunity to be heard may be through filing a written response. If a written response is filed, the court, in its discretion, may allow inclusion of the issue in the oral argument on the merits; otherwise it will be decided on the papers. FSM Dev. Bank v. Yinug, 12 FSM R. 437, 441 (App. 2004).
Rule 38 damages are determined in the appellate court and not remanded to the trial court for determination. Rule 38 gives the appellate court discretion in the damage amount awarded, which can be up to double the amount of actual expenses, and unlike other awards that may include attorney’s fees, Rule 38 awards are uniquely the province of the appellate court based on its determination of the frivolous nature of the appeal. A trial court does not have jurisdiction to impose Appellate Rule 38 sanctions. FSM Dev. Bank v. Yinug, 12 FSM R. 437, 441 (App. 2004).