Opinion
Original Action No. 99-002
March 9, 1999, Decided
ORDER GRANTING EMERGENCY MOTION UNDER RULE 27(t) TO STAY PROCEEDINGS
Before: DEMAPAN, Acting Chief Justice.
Based on the pleadings and arguments of counsel, the Court finds that the motion to stay the evidentiary hearings with the Special Master shall be GRANTED. In considering whether to grant a motion for stay, the tests that have been applied come from Vaughn v. Bank of Guam, 1 N. Mar. I. 318, 320. The moving party must show either a) combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury; or b) that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardship tips sharply in its favor. Vaughn, supra at 321. This Court finds the moving party has met the criteria to warrant the issuance of a stay for the following reasons.
There is a serious misunderstanding of the February 4, 1999 decision of the Supreme Court in this matter. The "Clarification Order" issued by the trial judges of the lower court has created further confusion to Special Master Kosack's fact finding investigation. It should be noted that the Special Master proceedings were never meant to be an adjudicative tribunal acting in lieu of a trial judge's functions.
Serious questions have arisen over the interpretation of this Court's decision to unseal the proceedings, including, whether the trial judges' interpretation of this court's February 4, 1999 decision is to be applied only prospectively.
Serious questions have arisen whether the trial court's grant of permission to allow Special Master Kosack the discretion to admit Mr. Rotbart in as an interested party even though he had been disqualified from further participation in this matter is in conflict with this Court's February 4, 1999 decision.
Milagros' potential hardships outweigh the Special Master's interest for an immediate trial. The balance of hardships tip sharply in Milagros' favor compared to the potential delay in evidentiary proceedings.
The Court is convinced that the moving party has demonstrated a combination of probable success on the merits and that she will suffer irreparable injury to justify a stay of the Special Master proceedings. The moving party has shown legal and factual justifications for granting a stay of the Special Master proceedings.
Accordingly, the moving party's emergency motion under Rule 27(f) of the Commonwealth Rules of Appellate Procedure to stay the proceedings is GRANTED, and the Special Master proceedings shall now be stayed pending the decision of the Supreme Court on the Writ of Mandamus and Prohibition.
SO ORDERED this 9 day of March, 1999.
/s/ Miguel S. Demapan
MIGUEL S. DEMAPAN
Acting Chief Justice