The case was initiated in 1990 when the plaintiffs motioned for injunctive relief against the Pohnpei Transportation Authority. They meant that they owned the land that the defendants used for dredging operations in order to get material for the construction of a road. The plaintiffs moreover meant that the dredging was done in a way that could harm the environment through noise, pollution and disturbance to the sea life. They moreover were deprived the right to construct homes on their land. The Court found, in a previous case, that the defendants had not obtained a valid earthmoving permit, so they issued an injunction to stop the earthworks until a valid permit existed. The Pohnpei Transportation Authority subsequently obtained one.

The plaintiffs had several claims that they argued including that the Trial Court had failed to award them damages for the alleged injury to their riparian rights. They also claimed that the injunction was a permanent on and that it should not have been dissolved.

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Trial Court, that the appellants did not have a right to the land, and therefore no interest in the land. The property used by the Pohnpei Transportation Authority was therefore not taken. Moreover, the Supreme Court found that the plaintiffs had failed to prove any damages to cognizable rights. The Supreme Court also found no proof supporting that the injunction should have been permanent.

Finally, the Supreme Court affirmed all decisions of the Trial Court in all respects.