GBB: “Latest Filing Just Another Attempt by Administration to Interfere With the Work of the Receiver”

271

Guam – Federal Receiver Gershman, Brickner & Bratton [GBB] has issued a statement in response to the billing objection filed Friday by the Administration accusing the Governor’s Office of  “another attempt” at interfering “with the work of the Receiver. “

In a statement to the media, GBB Principal Associate David Manning states:

“Contrary to Mr. Mantonana’s motion, the invoicing process has always followed the Court’s Order, however, because the Court is so thorough in its review, it takes longer than the 2008 Order anticipated.  The notion that the Government has been deprived of its ability to object is belied by the fact that he is filing just such an objection.”  

READ the billing objection filed by the Administration’s Attorney Rawlend Mantanona HERE

Manning says that a formal response to Mantanona’s complaint is being prepared. However he asserts that “all of the hours are fully justified and have been vetted by the Court.” Manning says that his hours are the same every month because he does not bill beyond 115.5 hour each month, “except when work is extremely heavy.”

“Had Mr. Mantanona simply asked me I could have told him”, writes Manning.

 

READ the full statement from GBB below:

This is just another attempt by the Office of the Governor to interfere with the work of the Receiver.  The Court is always very diligent in reviewing our invoices and always retains sufficient funds to address any legitimate challenge the government may make.  Contrary to Mr. Mantonana’s motion, the invoicing process has always followed the Court’s Order, however, because the Court is so thorough in its review, it takes longer than the 2008 Order anticipated.  The notion that the Government has been deprived of its ability to object is belied by the fact that he is filing just such an objection.” 

“We will respond to the specifics of the objection in Court, but I will say that all of the hours are fully justified and have been vetted by the Court.  Had Mr. Mantanona simply asked me I could have told him that the reason my hours are the same each month.  Except when work is extremely heavy, I simply do not bill for hours above 115.5 hours each month.  During the period cited by Mr. Mantanona I had more than 100 hours of work for which I did not bill.  Had I billed those hours, the total hours would have varied each month as one would normally expect.”