1:15-cv-00009 #9

8/9/2019 1:15-cv-00009 #9

1/5

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2

3

4

Mitchell F. Thompson, Esq.

R. Todd Thompson, Esq.

Thompson Gutierrez

Alcantara P.C.

238 Archbishop Flores Street, Suite 801

Hagatfia,

Guam

96910

Telephone: (671) 472-2089

Facsimile: 671 477-5206

William D. Pesch, Esq.

Guam F am il y L aw O f f ic e

173 Aspinall Avenue, Suite 203

Hagatfia, Guam 96910

Telephone: (671) 472-8472

Facsimile: (671)477-5873

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Kathleen M. Aguero and

Loretta M. Pangelinan

| i

«;::

? £ «•

feS^

DISTRICT CO^RT

Of

GU M

APR

13

2015

JEANNE

6.

QXnHAlA

Ct£R« OF COy«T

IN THE D IS TR IC T COURT OF GUAM

TERRITORY OF

GUAM

KATHLEEN

M. AGUERO

and LORETTA

M.

PANGELINAN,

Plaintiffs,

EDDIE BAZA CALVO in his official capacity as

Governor of Guam;

and CAROLYN

GARRIDO

in her official capacity as Registrar in the Office

ofVital Statistics, Department of Public

Health and

Social

Services,

Defendants.

CIVIL

CASE NO.

9

PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR

EXPEDITED RUL ING

COME

NOW,

Plaintiffs KATHLEEN

M.

AGUERO and LORETTA

M.

PANGELINAN, by and through their attorneys, and move pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(a) as

ORI IN LCase 1:15-cv-00009 Document 9 Filed 04/13/15 Page 1 of 5

8/9/2019 1:15-cv-00009 #9

2/5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

23

4

well as the Court's inherent authority to control its own docket, for this Court to expedite its

ruling in this matter.

PlaintiffsKathleenM. Aguero and LorettaM. Pangelinan are legally qualified to marry

under the laws

of

Guam. As articulated in their Complaint and companion memoranda

supporting their Motions for Summary Judgment and Preliminary Injunction, Plaintiffs

personally brought their application for a marriage license on April 8, 2015 to the Vital

Statistics Office

of

the Department

of

Public Health and Social Services ( DPHSS ), in

Mangilao, the

office that processes

marriage license

applications

on

Guam.1

DPHSS officials

refused to accept the application and handed the women two documents: (1) a 2009 opinion

letter from the Acting Guam Attorney General regarding common law unions; and (2) a copy

of certain provisions from Tile 10 of the Guam Code Annotated, including 10 G.C.A.

§

3207(h), indicating, [m]arriagemeans the legal union

of

persons

of

the

opposite

sex. 2 At

no time has any government official articulated any reason for failing to issue a marriage

license to Plaintiffs aside from their status as a same sex couple.

Plaintiffs filed a Complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief on April 13, 2015

seeking to secure the fundamental right to marry as guaranteed to them by the Fourteenth

Amendment to the United States Constitution as set forth in controlling Ninth Circuit

precedent, Latta v. Otter. 771 F.3d 456 (9th Cir. 2014),pet.

for reh g en bancdenied

779 F.3d

902 (9th Cir. Jan 9, 2015). Also on April 13, Plaintiffs filed and caused to be served Summons

on the Defendants herein, as well as the Office of the Attorney General, together with a motion

for summary judgment and supporting papers and exhibits.

1 Declaration of

Kathleen

M. Aguero ( Aguero Decl. ), at f 12 (Apr.

13, 2015);

Declaration of

Loretta M. Pangelinan ( Pangelinan Decl. ), at ^ 12(Apr. 13,2015).

2 Aguero Decl., at

^113,

Pangelinan

Decl.

atU13.

Case 1:15-cv-00009 Document 9 Filed 04/13/15 Page 2 of 5

8/9/2019 1:15-cv-00009 #9

3/5

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2

22

23

4

Plaintiffs now request an expedited ruling on the grounds that (1) they suffer irreparable

harm by any delay in the disposition

of

this matter due to the deprivation

of

their

Constitutionally-guaranteed rights; (2) the law

of

the case is well-established by binding

precedent

of

the Ninth Circuit Court

of

Appeals in Latta; (3) the harm to Plaintiffs caused by

delay far exceeds any likelihood

of

success by Defendants; (4) the facts

of

this case are simple,

well-known and undisputed, and there is no necessity for discovery or trial; and (5) an

expedited ruling serves both judicial economy and the public interest in resolving an important

issue.

Defendants might claim that the relief Plaintiffs seek is somehow premature in this

newly-filed case. They would be mistaken. In the following marriage-ban cases, courts

granted injunctive relief less than one month after issuance

of

binding circuit authority on

point. Condon v. Haley. 2014 WL 5897175 (D. S.C. Nov. 12, 2014) (granting injunctive relief

and summary judgment regarding South Carolina marriage ban less than one month after

initiation

of

action); Guzzo v. Mead. 2014 WL 5317797 (D. Wyo. Oct. 17, 2014) (granting

preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement

of

Wyoming's ban on marriage for same-sex

couples a mere ten days after the filing of the original complaint); Marie v. Moser. 2014 WL

5598128 (D. Kan. Nov. 4,2014 (enjoining enforcement

of

Kansas's ban on marriage for same-

sex couples less than one month after the commencement

of

the action [bjecause Tenth Circuit

precedent is binding on this

Court.

. . ). Likewise, in the instant case, there is absolutely no

principled reason to delay granting injunctive relief in the face of controlling Ninth Circuit

precedent on point.

District courts have likewise granted expedited summary judgments in favor

of

same-

sex plaintiffs.

See

Rolando v. Fox. 2014 WL 6476196, *4 (D. Mont. Nov. 19, 2014) (granting

3


8/9/2019 1:15-cv-00009 #9

4/5

1

2

3

4

. 5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

summary judgment invalidating Montana's constitutional ban on same sex marriage because

Latta

represents binding Ninth Circuit precedent and provides the framework that this Court

must follow ); Majors v. Home.

141

F. Supp. 3d

1313

(D. Ariz. 2014) (promptly granting

pending summary judgment motions challenging Arizona's same-sex marriage ban just ten

days after issuance of the Ninth Circuit's opinion in Latta); Hambv v. Parnell. 2014 WL

5089399 (D. Alaska Oct. 12,2014) ( Latta is the controlling law of this Circuit ).

Based on these authorities and other authorities more fully set forth in their April 13,

2015 memoranda supporting Plaintiffs' Motions for Summary Judgment and Preliminary

Injunction, expedited treatment

of

this matter is appropriate based on the Ninth Circuit's

controlling ruling in Latta. Rather than reiterate all those authorities at length, Plaintiffs hereby

incorporate them by this reference as if fully set forth herein.

Defendants have no legitimate justification to continue to deny or delay justice to

Plaintiffs, or similarly situated same-sex couples. This Court can rule expeditiously, as a

matter

of

law, that the purported Guam marriage license ban violates Plaintiffs' fundamental

constitutional rights to marry the person they choose by faithful application

of

controlling law

as set out by the Ninth Circuit in Latta.

This case is ripe for review without further delay; and this Court should put an end to

the unnecessary suffering, humiliation, stigma, and anxieties attendant to Guam's purported

marriage ban on Plaintiffs and all committed same-sex couples and their children who want,

and need, the security of marriage. As discussed below, every conceivable justification for

same-sex marriage bans has been considered and rejected by the Ninth Circuit in Latta. Thus,

it would be a colossal waste

of

judicial resources to prolong this case.


8/9/2019 1:15-cv-00009 #9

5/5

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2

2

23

4

CONCLUS ION

There is no effective or meaningful remedy for the loss

of

Constitutional rights; the only

remedy

of

any value is swift justice. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court grant an

expedited ruling.

Respectfully submitted this

13th

day ofApril, 2015.

THOMPSON GUTIERREZ

ALCANTARA

P

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Kathleen M. Aguero and

Loretta M. Pangelinan

By.

RANDALL

T DD THOMPSON

P15I025 .RTT


Documents

1:15-cv-00009 #9