4 TTR 231
PALIKNA NENA SEKU, Plaintiff
v.
NELSON SIGRAH, Defendant
Civil Action No. 305
Trial Division of the High Court
Ponape District
January 29, 1969
See, also, T.T.R. 215
HAROLD W. BURNETT, Associate Justice
By dispatch dated December 30, 1968, parties to the above-captioned action were advised to transmit any objections which they might have to the Master's Findings of Fact on the next available transportation from Kusaie. The court was subsequently, by dispatch January 9, 1969, advised that defendant's answer was pending and that his counsel was then in Ponape. Counsel filed nothing, nor did he advise the court of his intentions before again leaving Ponape, and the court therefore entered judgment on January 15, 1969.
Defendant himself has since filed his objection to the Findings. Under the circumstances, the court will treat such statement of objections as being equivalent to a motion for reconsideration.
The only fundamental objection filed by defendant is to the Master's Finding No.5, relative to the plaintiff having had possession of the whole of the land Fwinef for the period following the end of the war until approximately 1950, when he divided it between himself and defendant. Defendant contends that this finding is in "clear conflict with all available evidence". I do not agree. The Master's Finding on this point was supported by the great weight credible evidence which leaves little room for question that that portion, at least, of Fwinef which is here in dispute was planted and occupied by plaintiff alone.
Upon reconsideration I find no good reason to disturb the Master's Findings. The Judgment will therefore stand as entered.