FSM Development Bank also files a motion for injunction on C-Star Apartelle matter

By Bill Jaynes

The Kaselehlie Press

March 14, 2021

Pohnpei—On the same day as Feliciano Perman’s attorney filed a motion for an injunction against some of the members of the Setik family on the matter of the C-Star Apartelle, the FSM Development Bank also filed a motion for an injunction and expedited hearing at the FSM Supreme Court.  Their motion for injunction, filed on February 26, asks the Court to bar the plaintiff Setiks, and specifically their attorney from posting allegedly libelous and false statements regarding the disposition of the C-Star Apartelle and other matters the bank says were already decided by the FSM Supreme Court.

The motion provides examples of postings made by Irene Setik on the FSM Forum Facebook page and elsewhere beginning on February 23 making what the motion calls false statements regarding the status of C-Star ownership and calling for readers to fight on her family’s behalf.  That posting listed FSMDB employees by name.  The bank motion says that the posting personally endangered that person and others by calling for violence over issues that were long ago resolved.

“Setiks' Attorney Yoslyn G Sigrah personally instigated these actions and participated in the Setiks' continued trespassing at the C-Star premises,”the FSMDB motion alleges. “Attorney Yoslyn Sigrah refuses to accept the 2018 Appellate decisions and misrepresented the status of the cases to her client Irene Setik, as evidenced by Irene Setik's Facebook posts (which says), ‘2015 FSM Development Bank auction our CStar Apartelle. Why? I never been informed or aware of this.’”

“Through her posts and invitation to fight, Irene Setik put a bullseye on FSMDB's attorney…and made her a target of violence by Irene Setik's family members and supporters - all because her attorney Yoslyn G Sigrah misrepresented to her the 2018 Appellate decisions and continues to pretend those Appellate decisions do not exist. FSMDB, the FSM Supreme Court, and Feliciano Perman are also identified in Irene Setik's Facebook posts, which put their employees and family members at risk of violence from Irene Setik's family members and supporters,” the motion claims.

“Based upon these grounds, Defendants FSMDB and Mendiola move this Court for entry of a preliminary injunction against Plaintiff Setiks, including all those under them including Esther Setik and their Attorney Yoslyn G Sigrah to refrain from posting false and defamatory statements pertaining to the FSMDB / Setik / Mendiola / Perman cases, statements which contradict the FSM Supreme Court Appellate decisions, and statements inviting threats of violence directed (at) FSMDB, FSM Supreme Court, Feliciano Perman, FSMDB employees and/or family members,” the motion said.

It also asked the court to require Irene Setik to take down her Facebook posts of February 23, and 24, 2021.

At press time the court had not yet ruled to grant a requested expedited hearing on the matter. Setik’s Facebook posts on Facebook are also currently still available on the FSM Forum Facebook page which currently has over 7,000 members.

Last week, Attorney Yoslyn Sigrah called The Kaselehlie Press saying that none of what we had written on the matter of the motion for preliminary injunction filed by Feliciano Perman was true.  She also said that there was no eviction notice issued by the Pohnpei State Supreme Court.

However, that ruling is still in place and on March 9, Pohnpei State police were again called upon to remove one of Sigrah’s clients from the property of the C-Star Apartelle based on the eviction notice.  The eviction notice is in place and was issued by the Pohnpei State Supreme Court on September 10, 2020.

A footnote on the FSMDB motion for injunction says, “…in the complaint filed in this case, and in Setik v Perman, Civil 2021-002 (Pon), the Setiks make no reference to any of the three controlling 2018 Appellate decisions that have rejected the Setiks' claims and affirmed the judgments and order in aid of judgment in favor of FSMDB, nor make any reference to the writ of mandamus issued in Appeal P10-2019.”

The motion claims, “The Setiks' filing of more motions and more frivolous lawsuits, such as this one, does not change those Appellate Decisions which have been final for years. The Highest Court of our Nation has already considered all of Setiks' claims and allegations, and has rejected them.”

Comments are now closed for this entry