48 U.S.C. § 1424

District Court of Guam; local courts; jurisdiction

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 48 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) District Court of Guam; unified court system(1) The judicial authority of Guam shall be vested in a court established by Congress designated as the “District Court of Guam”, and a judicial branch of Guam which branch shall constitute a unified judicial system and include an appellate court designated as the “Supreme Court of Guam”, a trial court designated as the “Superior Court of Guam”, and such other lower local courts as may have been or shall hereafter be established by the laws of Guam.(2) The Supreme Court of Guam may, by rules of such court, create divisions of the Superior Court of Guam and other local courts of Guam.(3) The courts of record for Guam shall be the District Court of Guam, the Supreme Court of Guam, the Superior Court of Guam (except the Traffic and Small Claims divisions of the Superior Court of Guam) and any other local courts or divisions of local courts that the Supreme Court of Guam shall designate.(b) Jurisdiction

The District Court of Guam shall have the jurisdiction of a district court of the United States, including, but not limited to, the diversity jurisdiction provided for in section 1332 of title 28, and that of a bankruptcy court of the United States.

In addition to the jurisdiction described in subsection (b), the District Court of Guam shall have original jurisdiction in all other causes in Guam, jurisdiction over which is not then vested by the legislature in another court or other courts established by it. In causes brought in the district court solely on the basis of this subsection, the district court shall be considered a court established by the laws of Guam for the purpose of determining the requirements of indictment by grand jury or trial by jury.

(Aug. 1, 1950, ch. 512, § 22, 64 Stat. 389; Aug. 27, 1954, ch. 1017, § 1, 68 Stat. 882; Pub. L. 85–444, §§ 1, 2, June 4, 1958, 72 Stat. 178, 179; Pub. L. 95–598, title III, § 335, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2680; Pub. L. 98–454, title VIII, §§ 801, 803, title X, § 1001, Oct. 5, 1984, 98 Stat. 1741, 1743, 1745; Pub. L. 108–378, § 1(a), Oct. 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 2206.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2004—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 108–378 amended subsec. (a) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (a) read as follows: “The judicial authority of Guam shall be vested in a court of record established by Congress, designated the ‘District Court of Guam,’ and such local court or courts as may have been or shall hereafter be established by the laws of Guam in conformity with section 1424–1 of this title.”

1984—Pub. L. 98–454 amended section generally, striking out language which directed that no provisions of any rules which authorized or required trial by jury or the prosecution of offenses by indictment by a grand jury instead of by information be applicable to the District Court of Guam unless and until made so applicable by laws enacted by the Legislature of Guam, repealed that portion of section 1 of act Aug. 27, 1954, which had inserted such language originally, repealed section 335 of Pub. L. 95–598, which had amended this section, and transferred out of this section into sections 1424–1 to 1424–4, with amendments, the remaining provisions formerly set out in this section relating to the creation, jurisdiction, and rules governing procedure in the Guam judicial system.

1978—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 95–598, § 335(a), inserted “and a bankruptcy court”.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 95–598, § 335(b), substituted “section 2075 of title 28, in cases under title 11,” for “section 53 of title 11, in bankruptcy cases;”.

1958—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 85–444 provided that the District Court of Guam shall have jurisdiction in all causes arising under the Constitution, treaties, and laws of the United States, regardless of the sum or value of the matter in controversy, and to insert the paragraph requiring appeals to the District Court to be heard and determined by an appellate division.

1954—Subsec. (b). Act Aug. 27, 1954, inserted provisions making it clear that trial by jury or the prosecution of offenses by indictment by a grand jury instead of by information shall not be required in the District Court of Guam until so required by laws enacted by the Legislature of Guam; and defining the terms “attorney for the government”, and “United States attorney”, as used in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, when applicable to cases arising under the laws of Guam.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1984 Amendment

Pub. L. 98–454, title X, § 1005, Oct. 5, 1984, 98 Stat. 1746, provided that: “Titles VII, VIII, IX, and X of this Act [enacting sections 1424–1 to 1424–4, 1493, and 1613a of this title, repealing section 1400 of this title, amending this section and sections 1424b, 1561, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1617, 1694, and 1821 to 1824 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 1424b, 1612, and 1614 of this title and section 373 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure] shall become effective on the ninetieth day following their enactment [Oct. 5, 1984].”

Effective Date of 1978 Amendment

Amendment by section 335(b) of Pub. L. 95–598 effective Oct. 1, 1979, see section 402(a) of Pub. L. 95–598, set out as an Effective Date note preceding section 101 of Title 11, Bankruptcy.

Pub. L. 95–598, title IV, § 402(e), Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2682, which provided a prospective effective date for the amendment of subsec. (a) by section 335(a) of Pub. L. 95–598, was repealed by section 1001 of Pub. L. 98–454.

Effective Date of 1954 Amendment

Act Aug. 27, 1954, ch. 1017, § 2, 68 Stat. 883, provided that: “The amendment made by section 1 [amending this section] shall be deemed to be in effect as of August 1, 1950.”

Separability

Act Aug. 27, 1954, ch. 1017, § 4, 68 Stat. 883, provided: “If any particular provision of this Act [amending this section and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section], or the application thereof to any person or circumstances, is held invalid, the remainder of the Act and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.”

Nonreversal of Convictions Prior to August 27, 1954

Act Aug. 27, 1954, ch. 1017, § 3, 68 Stat. 883, provided: “No conviction of a defendant in a criminal proceeding in the District Court of Guam heretofore had shall be reversed or set aside on the ground that the defendant was not indicted by a grand jury or tried by a petit jury.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 104 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1952–2025 · leading case: Est. of Thomas Mall, Inc., in No. 90-3691 v. Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands, in No. 90-3649, 923 F.2d 258 (3rd Cir. 1991).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Est. of Thomas Mall, Inc., in No. 90-3691 v. Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands, in No. 90-3649, 923 F.2d 258 (3rd Cir. 1991). · cites it 5× “With respect to the Organic Act of Guam, § 22 in former 48 U.S.C.A. § 1424 , Congress made a similar provision for divestiture of the District Court of Guam where the local legislature vested jurisdiction in a local court.”

Nguyen v. United States, 539 U.S. 69 (2003). · cites it 2× “389 , 48 U. S. C. § 1424 ."The `District Court of Guam' rather than `United States District Court of Guam' was chosen as the court's title, since it was created under Art.”

Agana Bay Dev. Co. (Hong Kong) Ltd. v. Supreme Court of Guam, Dillingham Corp. of the Pac., Real Party in Interest, 529 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1976). · cites it 5× “The long standing existence of appellate jurisdiction in the district court compelled the creation of the procedures in the 1958 amendment to 48 U.S.C. § 1424 (b) (1975). However, the granting of appellate jurisdiction by the Guam Legislature to the district court was not…”

Commonwealth of the N. Mariana Islands v. Daniel Atalig, 723 F.2d 682 (9th Cir. 1984). · cites it 3× “48 U.S.C. § 1424 (a); id. § 1694b. This court’s jurisdiction over the district courts in Guam and the NMI is generally determined by 28 U.”

People of the Territory of Guam v. Concepcion Okada, 694 F.2d 565 (9th Cir. 1982). · cites it 3× “48 U.S.C. § 1424 . 4 The Act creates a District Court of Guam and authorizes the Guam legislature to create other *569 courts.”

Charles L. Corn v. Guam Coral Co., Inc., Panciteria Far East, Inc. v. Guam Coral Co., Inc., 318 F.2d 622 (9th Cir. 1963). · cites it 5× “By virtue of section 22(a) of that act, 48 U.S.C. § 1424 (a), a court of record, designated the “District Court of Guam,’ 1 was created.”

United States v. Frederick Obak, 884 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2018). · cites it 3× “See 48 U.S.C. § 1424 (b) (“The District Court of Guam shall have the jurisdiction of a district court of the United States, including, but not limited to, the diversity jurisdiction provided for in section 1332 of Title 28, and that of a bankruptcy court of the United States.”

Matao Yokeno v. Sawako Sekiguchi, 754 F.3d 649 (9th Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “” 48 U.S.C. § 1424 (b). B In 1988, 5 Congress amended § 1332 to include the following clause, known as the “deeming clause”: *653 For the purposes of this section, section 1335, and section 1441, an alien admitted to the United States for permanent residence shall be deemed a…”

Territory of Guam v. Olsen, 431 U.S. 195 (1977). · cites it 2× “[8] The question presented for decision here rather concerns appeals to the District Court from decisions of local courts in cases arising under local law.”

Hatchett v. Gov't of Guam, 212 F.2d 767 (9th Cir. 1954). · cites it 6× “United States; and (B) Since it is the law of this case that the court has such power, I dissent from the court’s advisory opinion and on grounding its decision both as to the right to indictment and jury trial on an interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure instead of…”

Michael J. Gioda v. Saipan Stevedoring Co., Inc., 855 F.2d 625 (9th Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “The clause “such appellate jurisdiction as the laws of the Northern Mariana Islands provide”, means, as do the corresponding provisions on Guam and in the Virgin Islands ( 48 U.S.C. § 1424 (a) and 1612) that the laws of the Northern Mariana Islands may restrict the right of…”

Pugh v. United States, 212 F.2d 761 (9th Cir. 1954). · cites it 4× “*765 That single issue is, has Congress created in the Guam district court by the express language of 48 U.S.C.A. § 1424 (a) the jurisdiction to try persons accused of felonies only by indictment unless waived, as in the district courts of the United States and as it has created…”

Show all 104 citing cases →

— 48 U.S.C. § 1424(a) — 3 cases

Pugh v. United States, 212 F.2d 761 (9th Cir. 1954). “*765 That single issue is, has Congress created in the Guam district court by the express language of 48 U.S.C.A. § 1424 (a) the jurisdiction to try persons accused of felonies only by indictment unless waived, as in the district courts of the United States and as it has created…”

Hatchett v. Gov't of Guam, 212 F.2d 767 (9th Cir. 1954). “United States; and (B) Since it is the law of this case that the court has such power, I dissent from the court’s advisory opinion and on grounding its decision both as to the right to indictment and jury trial on an interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure instead of…”

Globe Indem. Co., a Corp. v. Capital Ins. & Sur. Co., Inc., a Corp., 352 F.2d 236 (9th Cir. 1965).

— 48 U.S.C. § 1424(b) — 1 case

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.