Luis De Vera v. Vicente G. Blaz Phil Flores

De Vera, pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals from the decision of the Guam district court, appellate division, affirming the Guam superior court’s dismissal of his action against Blaz and Flores for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. De Vera contends the appellate division erred by deciding the appeal using a two-judge panel, by affirming the award of costs in favor of Flores, and by affirming the dismissal of his action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 48 U.S.C. § 1424-3 (c), and we affirm.

I

De Vera’s complaint alleged that Blaz and Flores breached a promise to employ him in Blaz’s office in consideration for his efforts in Blaz’s campaign for election as delegate for Guam to the United States Congress. De Vera sought to recover damages consisting of out-of-pocket expenses he incurred while working in Blaz’s campaign, damages stemming from the loss of expected income, general damages for mental and emotional distress, and punitive damages. Blaz was never served with a copy of the complaint and thus never be* came a party to this action.

Flores moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim under Guam Sup.Ct.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The Guam…