American Samoa Government
the Governor was, and still is, without authority to grant amnesty to undocumented aliens under his constitutional pardoning power or by other means. The governor can be empowered with that authority only by constitutional amendment or by legislative enactment. -
Vaela’a v. Sunia, 1 A.S.R.3d 134 (Trial Div. 1997)
The Governor was, and still is, without authority to grant amnesty to undocumented aliens, who have not been convicted of any criminal offense related to their illegal presence in American Samoa, in the absence of an effective constitutional amendment or legislation authorizing the governor to grant amnesty to undocumented aliens. - Vaela’a v. Sunia, 1 A.S.R.3d 134 (Trial Div. 1997)
The Governor was, and still is, without authority to grant amnesty to undocumented aliens, who have not been convicted of any criminal offense related to their illegal presence in American Samoa, in the absence of an effective constitutional amendment or legislation authorizing the governor to grant amnesty to undocumented aliens. - Vaela’a v. Sunia, 1 A.S.R.3d 134 (Trial Div. 1997)
assuming that § 41.0303 literally or implicitly encompasses initial authorizations to remain, the board remains ultimately responsible under A.S.C.A. § 41.0205(1) for the attorney general's decisions in these matters. -
Vaela’a v. Sunia, 1 A.S.R.3d 134 (Trial Div. 1997)
The board did not lose either its authority to make or responsibility for consummated decisions to grant first authorizations to remain simply by delegating any such power to the attorney general. - Vaela’a v. Sunia, 1 A.S.R.3d 134 (Trial Div. 1997)
The board did not lose either its authority to make or responsibility for consummated decisions to grant first authorizations to remain simply by delegating any such power to the attorney general. - Vaela’a v. Sunia, 1 A.S.R.3d 134 (Trial Div. 1997)
During the early part of November, 1919, Teo-Malala -
Afoa v. Sevaaetasi, 1 A.S.R. 317 (Trial Div. 1919)
Furthermore, the Legislature enacted the GTLA for the same reason Congress passed the FTCA: to waive the government’s sovereign immunity so as to provide those who have suffered, as a consequence of the government’s tortious conduct, with a legal avenue of redress and to hold the government accountable for its actions. It is this overriding purpose, and the textual similarities that the GTLA and the FTCA share, that ultimately carry the greatest weight. As such, we find federal case law interpreting the FTCA to be an appropriate and instructive source of persuasive authority for interpreting A.S.C.A. [**8**] § 43.1205 and A.S.A.C. § 43.0105 and for determining whether the regulation is incorporated into the statute. -
Soloa v. Am. Samoa Gov’t, CA No. 77-07, slip op. (Trial Div. March 29, 2012) (order denying mot. for reconsideration of order denying mots. for sum. j. and dismissal)
American Samoa Government officials may be held liable in their individual capacities for violating due process while acting under the color of territorial law. -
Bartolome v. JKL, Inc., CA No. 30-08, slip op. (Trial Div. Jun. 21, 2012) (order granting in part and denying in part def.’s mot. for summ. j.)
Government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. - Bartolome v. JKL, Inc., CA No. 30-08, slip op. (Trial Div. Jun. 21, 2012) (order granting in part and denying in part def.’s mot. for summ. j.)
Government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. - Bartolome v. JKL, Inc., CA No. 30-08, slip op. (Trial Div. Jun. 21, 2012) (order granting in part and denying in part def.’s mot. for summ. j.)
If a serious condition exists, ASG may place plaintiff on annual leave, reassign him to duties in which the condition does not exist, place him on excused absence, or suspend him with or without pay pending removal, provided the action is taken in compliance with all applicable laws and rules and is based on substantive and documented justification. A.S.AC. § 4.0802(e).
Fletters L. Gobrait, Jr., suffered cervical injuries at the Rainmaker Hotel swimming pool on August 23, 1975. He and his father filed this tort complaint over two years later, on February 21, 1978. The governmental defendants (Government of American Samoa, American Samoa Development Corporation, and LBJ Tropical Medical Center) promptly moved to dismiss the complaint as to them on March 8, 1978, on the grounds that plaintiffs had failed to comply with the requirements of the Government Tort Liability Act (11 ASC 7281 et. seq.). Basically, the Act provides that a tort action may not be instituted against governmental entities unless and until a claim has been presented to the Attorney General of American Samoa and the -
Gobrait v. American Hotels, Inc., 1 A.S.R.2d 1 (Trial Div., 1978)