Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of American Samoa

Magalei v American Samoa Government [2012] ASHC 6; LT 27-03 (9 March 2012)

OPINIONS

OF THE

LAND AND TITLES DIVISION

OF THE

HIGH COURT OF AMERICAN SAMOA

(2012)

AIONO WHITNEY MAGALEI, Plaintiff,

v.

AMERICAN SAMOA GOVERNMENT, TUI`ANA COMMUNAL FAMILY, MA`TAUA TE`O, and DOES I-X, Defendants.
________________________________

AIONO WHITNEY MAGALEI, Claimant,

v.

KENESARETA MOI and STEVEN LOTONU’U SIUFANUA representing the communal interests of HC LILI’I and HTC SIUFANUA COMMUNAL FAMILY, ALA’IASA FILIFILI, LEULI U. TE’O, MELODY TE’O-POLOA, and MIRIANA TE’O, Objectors.

ROY J.D. HALL, LDS CHURCH, JONATHAN and MOLITA POUESI, Necessary Parties.

High Court of American Samoa
Land and Titles DIVISION

LT No. 27-03
LT No. 6-06

March 9, 2012

[1] Although A.S.C.A. § 37.0102 explicitly states that the senior matai is the only individual authorized to request a survey of his family’s communal lands, it provides nothing that could be construed as precluding a senior matai from instructing a subordinate to sign a legal document on his behalf. Having an authorized proxy in one’s stead is a practice not unknown to the law.

[2] A matai has the authority to properly delegate a subordinate to sign the “Surveyor and Pulenu’u Certificate” in his behalf.

[3] Our previous holding under Faleafine v. Suapilimai, 7 A.S.R.2d 108, 113 (Land and Titles Div. 1988), in which he stated that a family whose senior matai title is vacant must select a senior matai before it can offer a land for registration, says nothing about precluding a senior matai from using his inherent authority to delegate responsibilities to immediately effectuate his intent.

[4] An Affidavit of Posting with a caption that mislabels the land in issue as privately owned instead of communal is not fatally deficient and does not interfere with providing interested parties and the general public proper notice if the land was mislabeled as a consequence of clerical error and the Registration Notice correctly labels the land as communal.

[5] An “Affidavit of Posting” will not be null and void simply because it is missing a signature from the Registrar or the Clerk of the Court.

[6] Nothing in subsection 37.0103(c), or Chapter 1 for that matter, requires the Territorial Registrar or the Clerk of the Court to sign and seal an affidavit of posting.

[7] The absence of a newspaper affidavit confirming the publication of the notice of registration is not compelling proof that the Registrar registered land in violation of notice requirement.