Whether the Supreme Court of Guam erred in interpreting the phrase "aggregate tax valuation" in the Guam Organic Act's debt-limitation provision, 48 U.S.C. § 1423a (emphasis added), as tying the limit on borrowing by the Guam territorial government to the full value of property on Guam rather than to the assessed value used for purposes of taxation.Question:
1) Did the Supreme Court of Guam err in interpreting the phrase "aggregate tax valuation" in the Guam Organic Act to mean the full value of property on Guam rather than the assessed value for the purposes of taxation? 2) Does the time the case was pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals count toward the time limit for seeking Supreme Court review?Note:
IN ADDITION TO THE QUESTION PRESENTED BY THE PETITION, THE PARTIES ARE DIRECTED TO BRIEF AND ARGUE THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: WHETHER THE TIME FOR FILING A PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM THIS COURT WAS TOLLED WHILE A PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR WRIT OF CERTIORARI WITH RESPECT TO THE SAME JUDGMENT WAS PENDING BEFORE THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT.