Ads by Google Ads by Google

ASG moves to dismiss lawsuit for property damage during police raid

Associate Justice Lyle L Richmond and Associate Judge Fa’amausili Pomele have taken under advisement the government’s motion for Summary Judgment and to dismiss with prejudice a lawsuit filed by Punamai Tuitele following the execution of a search warrant on Tuitele’s residence by the Department of Public Safety in August 2010.

Tuitele’s lawsuit was brought through his lawyer Mark Ude last year alleging police officers damaged and destroyed real and personal property when the warrant was executed. Tuitele is also asking the government for “lost rent” given that after the police executed the search warrant on his house he was unable to rent it out, given the condition of the house.

During a hearing held on Monday, Assistant Attorney General Bensy Benjamin told the court the plaintiff has the burden to prove his claims with facts and the law supporting his claims, however he has failed to provide both.

Benjamin noted the “takings” claim alleged by Tuitele should be dismissed, explaining to the court the plaintiff does not include any facts sufficient to support this cause of action and the government believes the plaintiff can prove no set of facts.

She added that Tuitele cannot remember the damages to the property, how the said damages were repaired, or the amount of money spent to repair or replace these purported damages.

“When asked for the receipt of the alleged repair, the answer to the government is, no. When asked how much were the damages, the plaintiff said he doesn’t know.”

The Asst. AG told the court there is something suspicious about this matter, given the plaintiff does not know how much was damaged from the police search warrant, nor how much money was spent on the repairs for the alleged damage.

She said plaintiff was unable to prove this indispensable ‘damages’ element of a valid negligence claim and consequently the negligence cause of action should fail, adding the plaintiff cannot recover damages for the rent he claims he lost while attending to the property damage since, at the time the warrant was executed, nobody was paying rent.

However, Benjamin stated that a year after the search warrant was executed someone moved to lease the house in question for $3,000 a month, which the plaintiff claims is what the government owes him, given that he was not getting rent due to the condition of his house.

Benjamin said the plaintiff files a claim against the government for compensation and yet he cannot remember, how much in value the damages are, or what was damaged from the police search warrant.

She moved for the High Court to dismiss this claim, given that after a thorough analysis of all the information provided by plaintiff in this matter, the claims presented appear to be without merit.

Ude in response told the court, it has been two years since Tuitele’s house was searched by police and “he honestly doesn’t remember what the damage is and how much damage.”

He said the government should be held liable for negligence, and it was negligent for DPS Officers to damage or destroy furniture or other private property, and the negligence was a direct and proximate cause of damage and destruction within Tuitele’s house.

“The police officer trashed the place” said Ude.