Courtenay chattels crowfooted as appeals judge refuses stay of execution
The ongoing saga of Vernon Harrison Courtenay versus the Social Security Board has hit another bump in its long and winding road. On Wednesday, an application by the Courtenay defense team to stay the execution of the judgement handed down on July thirty first was denied by resident Appeals Court judge Horace Young. Young said that as a single judge, it was outside of his jurisdiction to entertain the application and advised the lawyer representing the Courtenays, Philip Zuniga, to make an application for leave to appeal the judgement to the full court, whose next sitting is scheduled for October. Until then, Justice Meerabux’s ruling that V.H. Courtenay is to pay back three point three four million dollars, plus interest, to the Social Security Board, stands. The lawyers for S.S.B. have moved quickly to execute the judgment and today, assorted pieces of office equipment and furniture at the Courtenay Law Firm on Regent Street in Belize City were seized. News Five’s Patrick Jones spoke with attorneys on both sides of the case and found out that while one group enjoys the feeling of victory, the other is crying foul.
Q: “Wednesday’s judgement handed down by Justice Young, what in effect does that judgement say to the Social Security Board?”
Dean Lindo, Attorney for S.S.B.
“That means that the plaintiffs, the Social Security Board may now proceed to execute the judgement and that, you know, in the normal way that it’s done, you go and you, what they call it, crowfoot goods and chattels, or you cease the things and they’re sold at public auction.
But in the first instance the writ of “fairy something” talks about seizing the goods and chattels, that is personal property. If that isn’t sufficient, then you go for real property, you know, house and lot, house and building, that kind of thing.”
Philip Zuniga, Attorney for V.H. Courtenay
“I will tell you though that that is a very unusual thing to do. You see, the Social Security Board, or certainly the attorneys for the Social Security Board are very much aware that we have appealed the judgement of Mr. Justice Meerabux. We have lodged a notice of appeal, and given that Mr. Young has suggested that we need to leave. We asked for leave from Mr. Justice Meerabux which he refused. It is in a way saying I have made a judgement before and I don’t want you to go to the Court of Appeal. Given that that is so, and also they also know that we have again lodged an application to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal. So the proves continues, any decent attorney would advise his clients in the circumstances, let justice prevail.”
Dean Lindo
“I think Social Security has an obligation to the paying public and to the contributors to the Social Security fund to get back that money because if they don’t they will then be held responsible. I mean it’s a substantial amount of money that’s been out since 1992. This is not a question of stature. As you know the resident of the Untied States is facing questions from the grand jury, so I don’t think the law regards stature in terms of double punishment.
See our position is simple and straightforward. It’s not a case that you and I had a contract, I broke the contract and therefore you must pay me damages. Our contention is that Social Security paid cash – three point thirty four million dollars out of their coffers and our contention is well that we assume was not put into a current account. That must have been put in some interest bearing account. That is the normal thing. And all we are saying, we paid this three point four, so it’s not a matter of punishment. It’s a question of we want back our money.”
Philip Zuniga
“It is absolutely nonsense today that they want three point three four million dollars for which they did not get shares. Social Security Board got their shares. Those of you, those of the press who were at the trial last year, heard many witnesses say, Mr. Denton Belisle said on oath that he got the Social Security shares, that they were in his drawer. They have their shares.
In my heart, I know this is a political ploy quite frankly. The anxiety, Social Security Board has no reason to be anxious to get any money. There is no money for Social Security to get back. They paid their money and they have their shares.”
Q: “So at this point in time all Mr. Courtenay and yourself can do is sit by helplessly and watch his life’s possession be taken away?”
Philip Zuniga
“That’s about the sum total of it. Very sad state of affairs.”
Q: “Mr. Zuniga, as the attorney representing Mr. Courtenay, is it at all conceivable that Mr. Courtenay will make an offer to the Social Security Board to pay back the money that he is being accused of allegedly taking form them without delivering the shares?”
Philip Zuniga
“Conceivable, I don’t know, because Mr. Courtenay’s position is that Social Security Board paid their three point three four million for shares which they have received. It is extremely difficult for a man to say let me pay back money that I don’t have, money that came to me for things that you have already received.”
According to both Lindo and Zuniga, the move to crowfoot Courtenay’s assets is in accordance with the writ issued to the registrar of the Supreme Court. According to law, five days after the assets are marked and no offer is made to settle the judgement, the registrar general is then required to hire an auctioneer to sell the confiscated items to satisfy the judgement. While that may be so, News Five understands that just minutes after the Courtenay assets on Regent Street were crowfooted, an auctioneer presented himself at the office, apparently ready to conduct business. That the auctioneer happens to be the husband of incumbent Collet Division area representative has lent some measure of credence to Zuniga’s assertion that the whole case is politically tainted.
