Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands

The Court affirmed the Family Division's denial without prejudice of J.C.'s motion to stay the juvenile proceedings for a competency evaluation and its mandatory transfer of the matter to the Criminal Division.

The Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands affirmed the Superior Court’s award of attorney’s fees and costs to KLB Realty, holding that the court had jurisdiction, that KLB was a prevailing party under a liberal construction of § 541(b), that the award properly excluded fees for the underlying FED action, and that the…

The Court rejected Cajuste’s preserved federal precharge-delay claim because he did not show actual and substantial prejudice, and deemed his distinct Revised Organic Act claim and other undeveloped delay arguments waived.

The Court affirmed the order awarding King primary physical custody of CJK and denying Hill's emergency relocation request. It held that the partial mediated settlement agreement left school selection unresolved, requiring the Superior Court to apply relevant best-interests factors to school, residence, and custody…

The Court affirmed denial of Velazquez’s habeas petition. It held that counsel was not ineffective for failing to seek exclusion of a suggestive single-photo identification because the identification was independently reliable, counsel reasonably challenged the procedure through cross-examination, and Velazquez could…

The Court affirmed suppression of the cell-phone evidence because the warrant materials did not establish probable cause connecting a cell phone to the crime or particularly authorize its seizure.

The Supreme Court affirmed suppression of the cell-phone evidence because the warrant affidavits did not establish probable cause or a nexus between the phones and the alleged crimes, and the good-faith exception did not apply.

The Court held that the Superior Court could not use a nunc pro tunc order to backdate confirmation of a marshal’s sale when no confirmation action had occurred on the earlier date, particularly where doing so curtailed the debtor’s statutory redemption period.

The Court held that Alexander’s criminal case did not become final until the written judgment was entered on April 8, 2010, after the decision recognizing a noncitizen defendant’s right to advice about immigration consequences.

The Court held that the Superior Court inadequately certified the dismissal of BlackRock, Inc. as a final judgment under Civil Rule 54(b), but that the dismissal was immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine.

The Court held that Gibbs-Jackson’s appeal from the probate dismissal was ripe because the Magistrate Division had closed the case and she had chosen to stand largely on her petition rather than fully comply with the challenged directives.

The Supreme Court held that Pedro waived his challenge to the extension of time for RAVI’s appeal and, alternatively, that RAVI showed good cause for the extension. Applying the due-process guideposts for punitive damages, the Court concluded that the $275,000 award was excessive and reduced it to $25,000, a…

The Court held that Parcel 17-E was not added to the parties’ lease because the lease’s merger clause required signed written amendments and the record contained none. It reversed the denial of FirstBank’s Rule 59 motion because the jury’s damages award included rent and related charges for Parcel 17-E, which…

The Court held that it had jurisdiction to review the post-judgment contempt order and affirmed the finding that Streibich was in civil contempt. It concluded that the $500 fine and $2,200 in attorney’s fees were civil sanctions, and that clear and convincing evidence showed Streibich knowingly left his vehicle partly…

The Court affirmed the preliminary injunction protecting Dr. Wrensford against termination and temporarily barring a negative report while a formal investigation proceeds, concluding that she showed a reasonable probability of success on her procedural due process claim and irreparable harm concerning her employment…

The Court held that it could hear the government’s appeal because the defendant did not raise the omitted certification requirement, which the Court treated as a waivable claims-processing rule rather than a jurisdictional bar.

The Court held that an order disqualifying counsel in a probate proceeding may be immediately appealed within the Superior Court under the collateral order doctrine because delayed review could force the estate administration to be relitigated and deplete estate assets.

The Court held that the Government of the Virgin Islands was entitled to intervene to protect the Department of Labor’s workers’ compensation reimbursement interest because intervention was timely and the other required elements were met.

The Court held that the 2004 version of 3 V.I.C. § 530(a) authorized regular employees of executive departments, including Richards, to appeal suspensions to PERB, and that the contrary interpretation below was erroneous.

The Court held that the magistrate lacked jurisdiction to decide Magras’ motion for injunctive relief and that the resulting order was void. Because the Superior Court reviewed and affirmed that void order rather than making its own findings, it lacked jurisdiction to do so and did not cure the defect.

The Court affirmed summary judgment on Burt’s asbestos-related claims because the undisputed record showed that, by March 18, 2019, he knew or reasonably should have known both of his asbestosis injury and its cause, making his July 2021 complaint untimely.

The Court denied the request for an unconditional stay but granted mandamus in part, vacating the portion of the stay order that conditioned relief on a $10,800 supersedeas bond.

The Court concluded that WAPA is an unusually autonomous governmental instrumentality and that the Governor does not possess the same control over it as over ordinary executive agencies.

The Court rejected Williams’s unpreserved challenge to the malice instructions under plain-error review and concluded that any constitutional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Court reversed the order granting Liger a mandatory trial preference, holding that the age-based preference statute is procedural and unconstitutionally intrudes on the judiciary’s authority to manage its docket.

The Court held that Kenneth Sr. did not revoke the September Trust because the purported November Trust was invalid and the September Trust’s property therefore remained in it; it affirmed the denial of partial summary judgment and Naomi’s substitution as successor trustee.

The Court vacated the order revoking Faustin’s pretrial release and remanding him to custody because the Superior Court imposed indefinite detention for a curfew violation without considering less restrictive sanctions consistent with the right to reasonable bail and Rule 5.1.

The Court held that the 2011 land-sale agreement was enforceable and that Agueda breached it by failing to pay the amounts required. Marcano did not breach the agreement by failing to provide clear title before Agueda gave the contractually required notice of final payment; although she collected rent directly from a…

The Court affirmed Heath’s convictions, concluding that the officers’ compliance check did not violate the Fourth Amendment, that the searches were authorized by valid consent and plain view, and that Heath’s statement was volunteered rather than elicited by custodial interrogation.

The court granted the Legislature’s motion and dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice. It held that the Speech or Debate Clause protects the Senate President in her official capacity but does not immunize the Legislature as an institution, and that sovereign immunity bars Payne’s damages claim.

The Court states that the DeCostas cannot satisfy the hostility requirement of their adverse-possession claim and that it will affirm summary judgment for Ebbessen. The supplied opinion excerpt ends before the Court's full analysis and formal disposition.

The Court reversed summary judgment for Southern Holdings and Washburn because a landlord's duty in a premises-liability case turns on foreseeability, not whether the landlord retained the status of a land possessor.

The Court held that immunity under the Virgin Islands Workers’ Compensation Act does not limit the Superior Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction and is a waivable affirmative defense.

The court denied the motion to dismiss, holding that statutory immunity under Section 2(b) does not protect a government employee sued in his individual capacity. It also concluded that driving a police vehicle is a ministerial act, not a discretionary act protected by common-law immunity.

The court denied the tenant’s motion to alter the judgment or obtain a new trial because she did not present evidence sufficient to support a rental-value setoff. A party seeking a setoff had to prove the appropriate amount by a preponderance of the evidence, and the tenant’s unquantified water expenses and…

The court held that the approved Tentative Draft of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts governed the enforceability of the parties’ arbitration agreement and that the agreement should be enforced after balancing the relevant public-policy considerations.