Monrovia – The Supreme Court of Liberia entertained legal arguments in a land dispute case involving Rodney D. Sieh and Agriculture Minister Jeanie M. Cooper on Thursday, October 19, 2023, and has reserved its ruling for a later date.
By Victoria G. Wesseh
Supreme Court Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene Youh, speaking on behalf of the full bench, stated that the High Court had listened to arguments from the parties’ lawyers and would issue a ruling in the future.
Before the hearing on Thursday, Rodney D. Sieh’s lawyer, Cllr. Jonathan Massaquoi, requested the High Court to dismiss an appeal filed by lawyers representing Minister Cooper.
Cllr. Massaquoi argued before the Supreme Court, citing that on March 12, 2021, a writ of summons was served on Jeanie M. Cooper. However, on March 24, 2021, William G. Findley filed an Answer to the said Complaint, informing the court that the writ was improperly served upon him, as he was not the proper party defendant but rather his landlord. Co-appellant Elise Cooper was also not found in Liberia in response to the summons.
On April 16, 2021, Madam Cooper, represented by Cllr. Joyce Woods, filed a motion for an enlargement of time, to which the Appellee did not object. This motion was granted by the court on June 14, 2021, in accordance with the law. Subsequently, the court ordered Co-Appellant Cooper to file her answer within three (3) days.
On August 13, 2021, nearly two months after being ordered to file her answer, Co-Appellant Cooper complied and attached a certified copy of a warranty deed along with letters of administration for the Intestate Estate of John L. Cooper and Julius Cooper. Rueben Cooper was named as the Co-Administrator of said Estate. The pleadings were concluded after the appellee filed a reply on August 25, 2021.
During the case disposition, both factual and legal issues raised in the pleadings were addressed, and the case was set for trial on its merits. An investigative survey was conducted to establish the ownership of the subject property, and it was noted that Co-Appellant Cooper was absent without any written excuse justifying her absence from the investigative survey process.
However, on February 24, 2022, Cllr. Woods declined to provide further legal representation on behalf of Co-Appellant Cooper and subsequently withdrew her representation in accordance with the law. It’s important to note that Co-Appellant was previously represented by Cllr. Woods at the Paynesville Magisterial Court when Co-Appellant intervened on behalf of Alex Garley, who had entered a lease agreement with the Cooper’s Estate represented by its Administrators.
As a result, the writ for summary proceedings to recover possession of real property was dismissed because title was in question, and both parties were advised to pursue the matter in the appropriate forum, as required by law.
On March 14, 2022, Co-Appellant filed a motion for special appearance with the court, claiming a lack of jurisdiction over her person and asserting that the writ of summons was improperly served. Co-Appellant contended that she became aware of the ejectment lawsuit only after a local newspaper publication on February 28, 2022, mentioned her as a party defendant.
She insinuated that, based on this publication, she sought legal advice from a lawyer who informed her that Cllr. Woods had already represented all the Co-Defendants, including Madam Cooper, in the court below. She further contended that she had never retained the services of Cllr. Woods to represent her legal interests in the ejectment lawsuit and suggested that if the court’s precepts had been served on her, it would have been presented to Cllr. Woods to represent her interests.
On March 17, 2022, the Appellee filed resistance to the motion for special appearance, asserting that both the Appellant and Alex Garley were brought under the jurisdiction of the court below after proper service of the court’s precepts, as indicated by the Sheriff’s return.
The Appellee also argued that the Appellant, through her lawyer, filed a motion for an enlargement of time and subsequently submitted an answer that included a certified copy of a warranty deed and letters of administration on August 16, 2021.
Records show that an investigation was conducted to determine whether Cllr. Woods was retained by the Appellant to represent her legal interests in the ejectment lawsuit. It was established that the Appellant admitted that her sister, Elise Cooper, encouraged her to forward the court’s precepts to Cllr. Woods after they were presented to the Appellant by Bill Findley, a tenant of the Cooper’s Estate. It was also confirmed that Elise Cooper acknowledged in open court that the Appellant’s driver delivered the certified copies of the warranty deed and letters of administration to Cllr. Woods, who subsequently attached these instruments to the Answer.
Therefore, the court below concluded that Cllr. Woods was indeed retained by the Appellant, and since the Appellant had filed her Answer in response to the complaint, there was no basis to entertain the motion for special appearance.