Continued from Part 2
1. Tricky Dick says: "The Bronze Opinion, argues that the property has been alienated, and therefore, the seminary is no longer diocesan, is unfounded and ridiculous."
First, what kind of sentence is THIS! Let's help Tricky Dick with his grammar.
Why is there a comma after "The Bronze Opinion,..."? The Bronze Opinion is the subject and the word "argues" begins the predicate. There is no need for a comma after "opinion." Next, there is the matter that the phrase "is unfounded and ridiculous" is "unfounded and ridiculously" out of place. The sentence should read:
The Bronze Opinion argues that the property has been alienated, and therefore, the seminary is no longer diocesan. This argument is unfounded and ridiculous."
Okay, on to the meat of the matter.
The Bronze Opinion concerned itself only with the legal status of the property on which the seminary operates, NOT the nature of the seminary itself. That Tricky Dick believes that the Bronze opinion had anything to do with whether or not the seminary was "diocesan", is, well...."unfounded and ridiculous." LOL.
Later on, in the Conclusion, Tricky Dick calls the Law Office of Jacques G. Bronze, "an obscure law firm."
LOL. Attorney Jacques G. Bronze is known in Guam specifically for his expertise in Real Estate and Commercial transactions which is why he was retained by the CCOG to research the Declaration of Deed Restriction and produce a Legal Opinion which would hold up in court. The only thing "obscure" is Tricky Dick's brain which doesn't consider anyone important outside of himself. LOL.
2. Tricky Dick says: "The proper authorities for the determination of this issue were, first canonically, the judgement of the Pontifical Council of Legislative Texts..stating that there was no alienation….”
LOL. The legal status of real property on Guam is a matter completely subject to Guam law, NOT some council in the Vatican. SMH!!
3. Tricky Dick says: "...the Government of Guam by the Department of Land Management who has issued certificates of title confirming the ownership in the Archdiocese of Agana…”
The Department of Land Management does not "confirm" anything. The DLM can only record instruments affecting title to real property and issue documents reflecting those instruments.
As someone involved in real property transactions on a daily basis, I, as well as anyone else in my industry, can tell you that a certificate of title means nothing. What matters is the list of instruments affecting the title, including mortgages, liens, encumbrances, and a whole host of items that often turn up on a title report and may or may not be recorded on a certificate of title.
In the case of the Yona Property, the Declaration of Deed Restriction DID show up on the title report.
If the property was subject to a transaction, the interested party (a buyer or a lender) would have sought a legal interpretation of the the DDR before proceeding with any transaction involving the property, especially since the PTR identified a "grantor," obviously meaning that there was also a "grantee."
Grantor and Grantee are terms of conveyance. The conveyance was hidden by the title of the instrument which used the word "Declaration" and camouflaged the word "deed" with the word "restriction."
This is why in "the trained lawyer's" fake press release of 17 November 2015, "the trained lawyer" tried to keep us focused on the misleading title of the DDR and not it's content:
This is why the title report referenced Apuron at the "grantor."
We'll get to points 4 and 5 on the next post.
Continued on Part 4