Slider
Slider

|

Slider

Pacific Rim tells court not to rely on IPI’s promises

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

PACIFIC Rim Land Development LLC has asked the federal court not to rely on the promises of Imperial Pacific International LLC.

IPI has requested the District Court for the NMI to allow its investor to deposit $5,599,975 in a CNMI bank to secure the payment of judgment issued by the court in favor of Pacific Rim.

IPI also appealed the judgment and that appeal remains pending, said attorney Michael Dotts who represents the casino developer.

Pacific Rim attorney Colin Thompson, for his part, said IPI “did not previously object to the writs of executions for the sale of gaming machines and vehicles.”

Thompson said, “The objection asserted now by IPI essentially argues that the court should consider its previous order denying the stay and rely on the promise of Wenqiang Zou to pay money into a trust.”

However, Thompson said, “there is no trust account, no bond and no basis for the court to reconsider its denial of stay.”

“Nothing has changed,” he added.

Thompson said as the court noted previously “IPI has not filed a bond or other security as required under rule 62(b).”

IPI argues that there is no reason to advance on the writs because there is a “better way.”

But the “better way” advocated by IPI fails to put money in Pacific Rim's pocket, Thompson said.

“As presented by IPI, the court can rely only on the words of Wenqiang Zou. Even if one were to accept all of Ms. Zou’s promises as fact, Pacific Rim would not realize funds for more than 18 months,” Thompson said.

If IPI has the cash, it should pay the judgment or purchase an appeals bond, he added. “The reality is that IPI does not have the cash. Wenqiang Zou may have the cash, [but] there is no bond in place and no funds under the control of the court,” Thompson added.

He also said, “Even if the court had authority over Wenqiang Zou’s account, the court’s exercise of authority over her account as proposed by IPI would not be an enforcement action. IPI asks this court to halt enforcement proceedings in favor of a stay secured by a bank account over which this court has no control. IPI inaccurately argues that this would be a better use of the court’s judgment enforcement power.”

What IPI accurately is requesting, Thompson said, is for the “court to abandon its enforcement power so that IPI can continue to deny liability and delay payment on an enforceable judgment.”

IPI is also opposing the request of Pacific Rim for an order to auction the gaming machines and vehicles of the casino investor to satisfy judgement.

Pacific Rim sued IPI for breach of contract for refusing to pay for services in the amount of $5.65 million for the substantially completed or completed agreed-upon construction work for the IPI casino-resort project on Sept. 30, 2018.

On April 27, 2020, the District Court for the NMI entered a judgment in favor of Pacific Rim.

On May 2, 2020, the  court entered an amended civil judgment in favor of Pacific Rim in the amount of $6.8 million including the principal amount and attorney’s fees and costs.

Pacific Rim said the unpaid balance due on the judgment is now not less than $5,525,363.98.

November 2020 pssnewsletter

previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow
Slider

Read more articles

Visit our Facebook Page

previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow
Slider