Alliance Assurance Co. et al. v. Gov't of the V.I., SX-1982-CV-723 (V.I. 1983) [unpublished]
IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX AT CHRISTIANSTED ALLIANCE ASSURANCE CO. , DICK BOEHM ENTERPRISES, INC. & CLUB COMANCHE, INC. CIVIL NO. 723/1982 Plaintiffs _ ACTION. FOR DAMAGES VS. . GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS Defendant sane Smet Smet Somat See Sit ee rt Sat atl at Meet ate SCOTT SILVERLIGHT, ESQUIRE 46 King Street ‘Christiansted, St. Croix Virgin Islands 00820 (Attorney for Plaintiffs) JOYCE G. O'REILLY, ESQUIRE Assistant Attorney General P.O. Box 1074 . . Christiansted, St. Croix Virgin Islands 00820 (Attorney for Defendant) ‘ FINCH, Judge MEMORANDUM OPINION. AND ORDER This matter came before the Court on Plaintiffs! Motion for Entry of Default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55 (a) and Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for plaintiffs' failure to | comply with the procedural provisions of the Virgin Islands Tort Claims Act, 33 V.I.C. §§3408-3415 (1982 Supp.). Memorandum Opinion Alliance Assurance Co., et al.vs. Government of the Virgin Islands - A ruling.on defendant's motion to dismiss will resolve the matter before the Court. …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://superior.vicourts.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_12810747/File/Opinions/Archive/Alliance%20Assurance%20v%20GVI%20(RLF).pdf
SHA-256 08012d5757e94caa7c63eac078f276aa81edea24005730c794c6f28a329c3172
Re-using this document
edicts of government — judicial opinions are not copyrightable by anyone. NOT 17 USC 105 (territorial court, not federal) and NOT 'rights unstated'.
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-08012d5757e9
Document text
IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX AT CHRISTIANSTED ALLIANCE ASSURANCE CO. , DICK BOEHM ENTERPRISES, INC. & CLUB COMANCHE, INC. CIVIL NO. 723/1982 Plaintiffs _ ACTION. FOR DAMAGES VS. . GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS Defendant sane Smet Smet Somat See Sit ee rt Sat atl at Meet ate SCOTT SILVERLIGHT, ESQUIRE 46 King Street ‘Christiansted, St. Croix Virgin Islands 00820 (Attorney for Plaintiffs) JOYCE G. O'REILLY, ESQUIRE Assistant Attorney General P.O. Box 1074 . . Christiansted, St. Croix Virgin Islands 00820 (Attorney for Defendant) ‘ FINCH, Judge MEMORANDUM OPINION. AND ORDER This matter came before the Court on Plaintiffs! Motion for Entry of Default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55 (a) and Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for plaintiffs' failure to | comply with the procedural provisions of the Virgin Islands Tort Claims Act, 33 V.I.C. §§3408-3415 (1982 Supp.). Memorandum Opinion Alliance Assurance Co., et al.vs. Government of the Virgin Islands - A ruling.on defendant's motion to dismiss will resolve the matter before the Court. | For the reasons set forth below @efendant's motion to dismiss will be granted. Plaintiffs' suit is time-barred because of their failure | to comply with the procedural requirements of the Virgin Islands. Tort Claims Act, 33 V.I.C. et seq. Section 3409(c) of Title 33 of the Virgin Islands Code which states in pertinent part: [A] claim to recover damages for injuries to property or for personal injury caused by the tort of an officer or employee of the Government of the Virgin Islands while acting as such officer or employee, shall be. filed within ninety days after the ac- crual of such claim uniess the claimant shall within such time file a written notice. of irntention to file a claim there- for, in which event the claim shall be filed within two years after the accrual of such claim (emphasis added). Section 3410 of Title 33 of the Virgin Islands s code provides | in relevant. part: The claim or notice of intention shall be filed in the Office of the Governor and a copy shall be served upon the Attorney General and a written receipt therefor shall be issued with the date of filing indicated thereon... The claim and notice of intention to file a claim shall be verified (emphasis added). in: applying the above statutory requirements, plaintiffs' notice of intention is defective in that: Memorandum Opinion Alliance Assurance Co., et alvs. Government of the Virgin Islands 1. The notice of intention was not filed within the ninety (90) day period for filing tort claims against the Government as required by Section 3409(c) of Tif}e 33 of the Virgin Islands Code;— and 2. The notice of intention was not verified as required by Section 3410 of Title 33 of the Virgin Islands Code. Assuming, arguendo, that plaintiffs had complied with the procedural requirements of the Tort Claims Act by filing a. valid notice of intention within ninety days, the instant action is still barred because of plaintiffs' failure to commence their suit within two years of the accrual of the cause of action as required by Section 3409(c) of Title 33 of the Virgin Islands Code. Specifically, plaintiffs filed their complaint on August 412, 1982. This is more than three years after the accrual of their cause of action, which occurred on February 21, 1979, the date of the alleged tortious injury to plaintiffs' property. | Plaintiffs'suit is further barred by Title 5 V.I.c. Section 31(5) (A), which requires that an action for libel, slander, assault, battery, seduction, false imprisonment, or i/ Plaintiffs have filed with the Court a letter dated June 22, 1979, and addressed to Governor Juan Luis notifying the government of their intention to file a claim against the government pursuant to Title 33 V.I.C. §§3409, 3410. However, such notice was filed 121 days after plaintiffs cause of action had accrued. oF Memorandum Opinion Alliance Assurance Co., et al vs. Government of the Virgin Islands for any injury to the person or right of another not arising out of contract be commenced within Ewo years after the causé of action shall have accrued. Accordingly, plaintiffs have failed to comply with the procedural requirements of the Virgin Islands Tort Claims Act. Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) (1) _ of the Federal Rules therefore authorizes dismissal of plaintiffs' complaint for LaCK of subject matter jurisdiction. ‘Por the foregoing reasons, the Court must dismiss the complaint. £; DATED: April Lb | 1983. Ack Aoi Le Finch f “judge Raymong”