Ann Marie Seeley v. The Fruit Bowl, Inc. et al, ST-1981-CV-058 (V.I. 1982) [unpublished]
IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN ==Q0)== ANN MARIE SEELEY, : Plaintiff vs. CIVIL NO. 58/1981 THE FRUIT BOWL, INC., DAVID GOLDBERG, STEVE SESSA, and JOHN DOE Severally and Individually, li Defendants : STEDMANN HODGE, ESQ. P. O. Box 9910 St. Thomas, Virgin Islands (Attorney for Plaintiff) JAMES L. HYMES, III, ESQ. 40A Norre Gade St. Thomas, Virgin Islands (Attorney for Defendants) i MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER | (February 74 » 1982) | FEUERZEIG, J. | \. Plaintiff Ann Marie Seeley has filed a motion for a new trial on the sole issue of damages pursuant to Rule 59. of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or, in the alternative, for an additur. Plaintiff states that the court by permitting the plaintiff to be impeached by her conviction for robbery, which is presently being appealed, misled the jury into making an erroneous award and that the amount awarded by the jury was grossly inadequate. The court will deny beth-ef plaintiff's motion.. …
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/Seeley%20v.%20Fruit%20Bowl%20(HLF).pdf
SHA-256 c793a79d861a7b8187d08cff815749c13b9caa40d2a17b6735141c6fe148fcac
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-c793a79d861a
Document text
IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN ==Q0)== ANN MARIE SEELEY, : Plaintiff vs. CIVIL NO. 58/1981 THE FRUIT BOWL, INC., DAVID GOLDBERG, STEVE SESSA, and JOHN DOE Severally and Individually, li Defendants : STEDMANN HODGE, ESQ. P. O. Box 9910 St. Thomas, Virgin Islands (Attorney for Plaintiff) JAMES L. HYMES, III, ESQ. 40A Norre Gade St. Thomas, Virgin Islands (Attorney for Defendants) i MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER | (February 74 » 1982) | FEUERZEIG, J. | \. Plaintiff Ann Marie Seeley has filed a motion for a new trial on the sole issue of damages pursuant to Rule 59. of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or, in the alternative, for an additur. Plaintiff states that the court by permitting the plaintiff to be impeached by her conviction for robbery, which is presently being appealed, misled the jury into making an erroneous award and that the amount awarded by the jury was grossly inadequate. The court will deny beth-ef plaintiff's motion.. Rule 609(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence provides that in a criminal case for impeachment purposes a court may admit ' evidence of a defendant's conviction if the crime was punishable by imprisonment in excess of one year. If the crime involves dis- honesty or false statements, it is automatically inadmissible. Rule 609(e) further provides that the pendency of an appeal does not render the evidence of a conviction inadmissible. The defend- ants, in this civil case, introduced as Defendants' Exhibit No. 1 2" a December 23, 1981 judgment and commitment of the plaintiff by the District Court for the offenses of second degree robbery and petit larceny. Clearly, therefore, the admission of plaintiff's conviction in this civil case was permissible. Furthermore, the court is of the opinion that the jury's verdict was based on the evidence submitted to it and that the instructions submitted to the jury were clear and precise. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for a new trial or, in the alternative, an additur, is denied. DATED: February yA 1982 YL. FEUER Jifdge of the Ter rial Court