SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
DIVISION OF ST CROIX
GLEN GEORGE SELKRIDGE
PLAINTIFF, Civil N0 SK 2020 CV 761
V COMPLAINT T0 QUIET TITLE
ERMIN ORETHA GREENE AND DAVID CITE AS 2022 VI SUPER . {3‘
BYRON JOHNSON JR
DFFEINDANTS
Appearances
Charlotte S Sheldon, Esq
McChain Hamm & St Jean
Christiansted U S Vitgin Islands
For Plaintiff
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
(ll 1 THIS MATTER came before the Court on Plaintiff Glen Geoxge Selkridge 9 (heteinafter
Plaintiff ) motion for default judgment filed on December 16 2021 '
BACKGROUND
‘fl 2 On October 23 2020 Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendant Ermine Otetha Greene
(heteinaftet Greene ) and Defendant David Byton Johnson Jr (heteinatter Johnson and
together with Greene Defendants ) to quiet title to the following pioperty N0 20 Building E
The Towels Condominium Rem Parcel No 2 Estate Contant 7A Southside Quartet St Thomas
U S Vitgin Islands (hereinafter Ptoperty ) Plaintiff s complaint did not set forth the counts in
1 Thu caption 0t Plaintiff s Ducmbcr 16 2021 motion is titled Plaintiff s Remch Motion for Entry of Default
Judgmcnt Howuu Plaintitt nott.d in its motion that [t]() thc CXILnI that this Court [LndU‘S renewal m
reconsideration of {ht motion for default unwan anttd or improper Plaintiff requcsts that [hL Court Lonsidu [ha instant
Motion as a new requust tor dctault judgmcnt (Motion p 1 n I ) Plaintilt pruiousiy mo» ed for a staultjudgant
in connection with thL initial tomplaint In his Detembcr 16 202i motion Plaintitt m0th tor a detaultjudgment in
Lonncction with [ht first amcnded complaint rathcr than tht. initial LompIaint Thus Plaintiff s Deumhcr l6 2021 is
not a ram.de 0! his pruious motion and thc Court will LOTISKI’UL Plaintiff s Dcccmbtr 16 202! motion as a ncw
thucst tot dctaultjudament
SeI/utdge t 6108119 er a]
SK 2020 CV 76E
Memorandum Opinion and Order 2822 VI SUPER ‘
?agt 2 01‘ [2
separate numbered paragraphs with sepmate designation of the specific names of each cause of
action in the pleadings as required under Rule 8 of the Virgin Islands Rules of Civil Procedme
(hereinafter Rule 8 ) ’ However Plaintitf acknowledged in the caption that it is a complaint to
quiet title Plaintiff sought for (i) a judgment that Piaintiff is the fee simple owner of the Property
(ii) ajudgment that Defendants do not have any right title or intetest in the P1 operty , (iii) attorney 9
fees and costs, and (iv) fu1ther relief as the Com: may deem proper The foilowing documents
were attached to the complaint as Exhibit 1 a copy of a walranty deed dated OCIObCi l4 20l6
(hereinaftet Ottobel 14, 2016 Warranty Deed ) a copy of a document titted ‘Affidat it for
exemption from stamp taxes according to Title 33 Section 128 of the V I Code and a copy of a
documenttitled Real ptopertytax clearance letter ACCOtdingtothe Octobet 14 2016 Warranty
Deed PEaintiff as the grantor granted and con‘veyed ail of his right title end interest in and t0
the Property to Defendants as the grantees
‘fl 3 On February 23 2021 Plaintiff filed a motion for entry of defauEt A copy of the compiaint
a copy of the proofs of servfice for Defendants and a copy of an affidaVit of counsel was attached
to Plaintiff s motion f0: entiy of default as Exhibit A Exhibit B and Exhibit C respectiveiy
Acc01ding to the proofs of service Defendants were served on January 20 2021 at 9315 Bardeen
Way Iowa Cotony Texas in the following manner {b]y delivering a true copy of the summons
and complaint and ieaxing with Jane Doe who is known to be the co resident and a competent
’ Rule 8 mandates that a pleadinv that states a claim for Mid must contain (E) short and plain statement ot the
Grounds for the. LOU] t s jmisdietion unless the court already has jurisdiction and the daim needs no new iurisdietionat
support (2) a short and plain statement of the Llaim showing that the pEeadel is entitled to reliet because this is a
notice pleadino jurisdiction and the pieading shall be set torth in Separate numbered paragraphs as prmided in RuEt.
mm} with separate designatlon of counts and defenses for each claim identified in the pleading and (T) a
demand tor the rehet sou0ht which may intlude relief in the alternatite 0r éitterent types of relief V I R Civ P 8(a)
(emphasis added)
Selktidget Greene eta!
SK 7020 CV ’76]
Memorandum Opinion and Order 2022 VI SUPER I L4}
Pace 3 of 12
household member over 14 yeark; of age residing therein and ‘[s]aid premiees is recipients usual
place of abode within the state 1 (Motion for Entry of Default Exhibit B )
(ii 4 On March 16, 2021 default was entered against Defenéants
(fl 5 On April 16 2021 PEaintiff filed a motion f01 defauitjudgment On June 3 202: the Count
entered an order whereby the Court ordered Plaintiff to supplement his motion for default
judgment with a idence showing that neithet Defendant Greene n01 Defendant Johnson is a mino:
an incompetent petson or a person subject to the prOVisions of the Servicemember's Civil Relief
Act of 2003 and/or an affidavit stating such and reserved ruling on Piaintiff s motion pending
receipt of Plaintiff s supplemental fiiing 4
1‘ Ruin 4 0t [ht Vinain Islands Rims oi CiVii Proudutc (hcrcinattcr Rule 4 ) gaunt, sank: oi pawns Rah. 4(1)
prmidLS that Wham. 5 V I C § 490? on 0thu applicablc law p1 minim {Or [ht assertion of pummel! jutisdictiun m a
a puma imam] outsidL Eh; ViIUin Islands [ht punisions and proudqu of Thin 5 V I C Chapter 503 shall bx.
loliovud inLEuding but not Eimitud 10 thL proudurcs for SLl‘ViLt. and the tiling 0t prim: 0i sunk; eat 101th in 5 V E C
§ 49“ VI R CW P 4th Tit]; 5 V I C § 49“ pl()\id£,b that [Minn (ha law at this tumor) authorizas SLFViLL
outsidc this tumor) {ht sawing “ht“ :Lasonabiy caELuIatLd t0 gin actual mom; may b; math. (i) b) parsonal
dLiiVLl‘) in tin manna prunide tor 5min within this tummy Tim. 5 V EC § 4911(3)”) Hm. Dcicndants
tum hLlVbd in a mannu' pusuihcd to: sum“ within (ht. U S Vitgin islands See Ru]; 4(b)(2) ( Unlcss law 01 1h;
Vitgin IsEands plOVidLs ()thI‘WiSL an individual 0ter than a mint): an inmmpctcnt pawn 01 a pawn whom.
waiur has bun hind may bx, 5mm] in tht. Virgin Islands b) doing an), of tht. ioilowing {2) km ing :1 mm of II]:
summons and LompEaint at 1h; indix idual s tiwcilino or usual piau, of abode with summon; 0f suitdbh. act. and istrction
who rcsidcs than )
4 In (ht. Jam. 1 2021 01th thL Court prlaimd
Upon luiew 0! “1L fiiL it has norm to thc Court 5 attuttion that PEaintiii did not proxidc with its
pinious motion lor mm 0% dtfflUlE or instant motion tor dawn iudgmmt an}, within; showing that miter
Dcicndant Guam ROI Dnienéant Johnson is a minor 2m incumpnttnt person or a puma suhieLt :0 tin.
provisions of 11“. Seniauncmbcrs Civil Relief Au 0t 2001 or an aifiddVit stating such Thane art, additional}
mics t0 surfing a mitten m an inmmpctnnt pawn ’ and a le‘bOI‘I subjcct t0 thL SetxiLLmLmbcrs Cixil RLiict
Act of 2001b proud“! from bunt! stud “hilt. in actiu. miiital} schiLe ‘ As such the. Court “iii vim
Plaintiii an opportunity t0 mmdy (ht. dammit) and rcsuu rulino on Piaimift s instant motion
”This 5 V I C § 11E plOVidLs
§ lil Semi“ on infant or incompetent po'SOFI
In tin Lasu) rcitrred to in Ruin 4(d)(2) 0f the cheral Rules 0! Chi} Proudurc surxicc shah be madt as
iollows
(1) Upon an infant by deliwring a LOP) oi the. summons and of th; wmpiaint t0 tin. iniant pummel“)
and aka [0 his tater mothu or guardian or it [hue is none within [ha Virgin islands then to any
pawn having the care or Lemmy} of such infant or with whom he lnsidcs or in whose benign he is
cmpioycd
Selkndge I Greene er a!
9X 2020 CV 76! I
Memorandum Opiuion and Order 2022 VI SUPER b
Page 4 0t 12
III 6 On July 2 2021 Plaintiff filed an affidaVit wheieby Plaintiff declared under penaity of
perjury that neithei Defendant Greene nor Defendant Johnson is a minor an incompetent person
or a person subject to the piovisions 0f the Servicemember 8 Civil Relief Act of 2003
(ii 7 On August 11 2021, the Court entered a memorandum opinion and order (hereinaftet
“August 1} 2021 Order ) wheteby the Court ordered intet alia that Plaintiff‘s Apzil 16 2021
motion for default judgment is denied and that within thitty (30) days from the date of entry of
this Memorandum Opinion and Order Plaintiff may file a proposed fitst amended complaint
drafted in compliance with the Virgin Islands Rules of Civit Procedure inctuding but not limited
to setting forth counts in separate nttmhered paragtaphs with sepaiate designation of the specific
names of each count in the pleadings as required under Rule 8 0f the Virgin Islands Rules of Civil
Piecedure and name the defendant on defendants for each count clearly 5 (Aug 11, 2021 Order )
(2; Upon a puma judteialt) deelated to he of unsound mind or ineapahie (It eondueting his oven attairs
tor whom a guardian hat. been appointed by eieiiteltng 3 mp) 01 the summons and 01 the eomplaint t0
the detendant pet $01M”) and also to sueh guardian
‘The Senieememhers Cixil Retiet Aet 01 200? Iormetly known as the Soldiers’ and Saiiors' Citil Relief
Aet of 19-10 is a tedetal law that gins 2111 mititat} memhets some important rights as they entei aetixe (tut),
ineluding but not limited to proteetion from hem" sued while in aettu militaty Seniee oi theit eotlntry
(June ? 2021 Order p 2)
‘ In the Auousl It 2021 Order the Courtexplained
In his motion Ptatntiit requested that a detauttjudgment he entered ordeting that Plaintiff is the
tee simpleownerotttllright title and intetest t0 the Propelty that the eurt‘ent deedinadxertenti» eonVeying
title to Defendants is hereby nullified and eaneelled tot attorney 3 tees and eosts ineurreti in proseetttino this
matter and sueh further reliel as this Court may deem just and proper (Motion p 3) Plaintitt made the
following assertions in suppoit 01 his request ti) [1111 Eight of the entry of default the alleoations in the
Compiaint hate been suhaequmtly admitted by Defendants and cannot no“ he eontested “ (Id at p 2) (ii)
This is a simpte quiet title action Putsuant to 28 V I C § 371 any petsem in possession by himSeEf or his
tenant of real pioperty may maintain an aetion of an equitable nature against another who elaims an estate
01‘ interest therein amuse to him to: the purpme 0t detetmining sueh elaim estate or iuterest (Id ) and
(iii) Plaintitt did not intenti to transfer his entire interest to Defendants and as sueh the Warranty Deed did
nut validly pass title to Defendants " (Id at p 1 )
I Whether Plaintiff is Entitted to a Judgment by Default
In melel tor the Court to consider whether the unehailenged fuels eonstitute a legitimate eause of action the
Court must first diseem the eauses 0t aetion aileged in Plaintiff s eomplaint Here as noted abme Plaintitt s
eomptaint did not set to: (h mum: in separate numbered paragraphs with sepatate designation of the specific.
names of eaeh eount in the pleadings as requiied under Rute 8 Nevertheiess this error is not fatal if Ptaintitt s
complaintsuttteiently putDetendantson notiee of the elaims‘ broughtagainstthem SeeVI R Cit P 8(a)(2)
t {The Virgin Islands} is a nutiee pleadianurisdietion ) Mills Wilhelm: 1 Mapp 67 VI 574 583 (2017)
Selkudge t Greene er a!
SX 2020 CV 76] i ‘
Memorandum Spinion and Order 2022 VI SUPER
Pilot. 5 0t 12
( Virgin [stands RUE: 0t Chi! P10udun. 8 exprLssEy 51:3th that thc VirOin [stands is
a notiu. plcadino iurisdittion V I R C“ P 8(a) and thc chortu 3 Not; climinatcs any doubt that this
languagc is LaiLUEattd to apply{ ] an approath that (let [met to emu dismissais of cases basnd 0n tailurn t0
:11!ch spunk. iflLEbWhiLh if tstabiishtd plausibly smith. {ha plcaéu t0 rulitt (citing Vi R Cw P 8
RLpOl‘lLI‘S Not; (UBPhElSiS Edda”) (Liting Biallmatte 1 HD VI Holding Co 20E? VI LEXIS 76 at *3
(V 1 5:1er Ct Ma) 24 2017) (ackntmluiginU that Virgin Istands CiviE Procudure Rule 8(a)(2) eiiminatts
{ht plausibiEity standard and instLad will pcrmit a Lompiaint so long as it adnquattly allegLs tans that put
an aLLUSLd party on noting of claims brouaht avainst it )) Williams 1 Gallbe: 70 VI 226 ”>0 (Suppl Ct
2019) ( Non“ plcading mums that aCompiaint is suffititnt when it adamantly alingcs talus that put an
accused on notiu. 01 claims blought against it )
Basal on PEaintitt s allwations in the wmpfaim and Plaintitt s aaknow ltdomtnt in thc caption that
it is a LompEaint to quid titk. 11'“. Court finds that IE1: complaint has suitiLiLntE) put thcndauts on notiu. 01
Plaintilt s quid mic Liaim Plowman tin, Count finds that Plaintiff .s Lompiaint also include tmnter Llaim
although it is unLitat whathu this other must. at anion tails 101 rtscission 0E (ht. ()Ltobcr 14 2016 Warranty
Eta?J 0r tails to: a (quaratmy judgment that [ht {kmer 14 20m Wanting Dad is mid hum its
incaption 1” Gina tht. tank of clarity rcgatdina “hum: this 0(er claim Lam tor rtscission or a dLLiaI'flEOl}
iudcmtnt and giun thy lack of facts aIEeng in the complaint (ht, Cowl linds the complaint has not
sufiiciutt!) put Dtltndants 0n notitt oi the claim that is bmuOht against than to ddmé See Oilet 1 Such
Bat Club & Remit Corp ZOIS Vi LEXIS 81 at 10 (VI €11er Ct May E4 20I8) { Bazaar} upon (ht.
diiiLanLLs among nutiu. pELading fact pitading and the plausibility standard this Court dLlleil‘tLS that a
complaint mud not pELad iatts to support tam Llumnt of a Liaim in 01'st t0 aduquatcly fliibgt. tacts that put
an accustd party on notiu. 01 t0 showf} thc plcadtr is untitled to raid undo] VI R CtV P 8(a)(2) But a
wmplaint should prmidt faulted alitgations sufliLiLnt to advise thL rtspundino patty 0t [hL transaction or
ULLmTLnLL on which tilt. claim is hasnd anti idcntity the claim rLLiting its LELanIS so as to math]:
thy (itfmdant t0 rLspond intLEIigcntEy and t0 Lnabh. the. Court to dattrminc on a motion to dismiss undcr V I
R C“ P 120.0(6) mam the claim is adcquatd) plLd } As such EhL Conn finds that Plaintitt is not
LfliitiLd to ajudgmcnt by dctault at this iunLturc
" Piaintitt ftfbrbRLLd Kng 6] VI at 1—16( by his dLianl admittcd thL pEaintitt 1s Wt." pELade allegations
0t tact [ht] is LOHLIBde 0n (hoist. taLts b} 1m jutivment and is balTLd £10m LOI'EtLSIifl" tht. mus thus
cstablishcd Hating Hamgan 2014 WL 442845! at 7:} (quoting Nishimumu Cmnn CU t Houston Nail
Bank 5E5 F26 E200 [206 (5th Cir 1975)) Bank of Nata S((Jflal Date 57 VI IDS [10 (VI Sup“ Ct
20I2) {aim {ht mu“) 0t dctauEt a ttial Lourt aLLLpLS (ht. tactual alicgations 0t (ht, Lomplaint as true cxccpt
ton thus: muting thc amount 0t datnagts )
Piaintittrcttrcntcd RedemptionHoldings [m 1 Hall 2013 WL 13579219 at <2 (VI §upu‘ Ct Pub 25
2015) (11M sub mun Redemption Holdmgs Inc 1 Gm (0f the V11 gm Islands 65 VI "’4? (20K))
" Plaintiftrttcrmud S& SSens 1m \ Rogers 40VI DO ”527 ”45 F Supp 2d 459 46? 646) V1 1999)
( In mt Virgin IsEands a proptrly LXLLuttd dud is vaEidiy ddiurui [0 pass titEc oniy v. hen it is duliurLd
b3 the orantor t0 Eh; gtantu with m pusent intuit t0 transtcr titit. PossLssion 0f {hL (1th was not gitcn
t0 hm" with {ht intention 0t thumb) passing titk 0t tht. ParLeE to hex AccordinUEy PM nwrdation of thc dud
purporting to “fill titlL in ha is mid and must ht. canteled of record )
Q In Sneibich t Undent god the Vircrin islands Suprcme Court noted that {a} duet! is a contract and thus in
most LirLumstanLes tilt. plinciplcs of contract interprLtdtion gourn 2021 VI 1 fl 2-1
I” In PEaintitf s praytr t0! rclict in 111:. wmplaint Ptaintiff 5.15de to: inter alia ajudummt that Defendants
do not ban, any right title or intchst in Elm~ Proput) {Comp} ) {a his motion Plaintift rcquested a default
inclement be catered ordering that [ht caught deed inadscrtcntly Lonuying title [0 DLandants is harm)
nullificd and Lanuikd (Motion p 3 )
(Au 1| 202E Ordu)
settmtgm Greent eta!
SX 2020 CV 763
Memoramium Opinion and Order 2022 VI SUPER L
Page 6 01 12
(ll 8 On Septembet 7 2021, Plaintiff filed a notice of compliance with the Comm 9 August 11
2021 Older and attached a redline copy of the new proposed first amended complaint Iefiecting
the changes made to the initial compEaint and a clean copy of the new proposed fin: amended
complaint as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 tespectively
‘11 9 On Septembei 28 2021 the Court entered an ozder wheteby the Coutt approved Plaintiff’s
ptoposed first amended complaint deemed it flied on September 7 2021 and ordeted Plaintiff to
sexve a copy of its first amended complaint as required undet Rake 15 1 of Virgin Islands Rules of
Civii Procedure
(fl 10 On Decembet 16 2021 Plaintiff filed this instant motion
STANDARD OF REVIEW
‘1[ 11 Ruie 55 0f the Vitgin Islands Rules of CiVil Procedure (hereinafter Rule 55 ) gmems
entry for detauit and default judgment When a patty against whom a judgment for affhmative
teiief is sought has fdiied to plead or othetwise defend and that failure is shown by affidavit or
otherwise the court or the clerk must crate: the patty s detauit V I R CIV P 55(3) An entty of
default does not necessitate a default judgment See Chaput v Scaftdt 66 V I 160 188 (Super Ct
June 14 2017) ( Piaintiffs do not win by default just because the defendants tail to appear )
[W}hen default is; entered against a defendant the defendant is admitting only to the aliegations
against him as alieged in the charging document Redempth Huldmgs Int 1 Gm rat the VI
65 V I 243 255 (V I 2016) (eitin ng t Appleton. 61 V I 339 346 (V I 2014)} In ang the
Virgin Islands Stapleme Coutt pointed out that ‘the Supetior Court must consider whether the
unchalienged facts constitute a tegitimate cause of action since a party in default does not admit
mere conclusion of law and that if the Superior Court determines that the unchallenged facts
constitute a legitimate came of action then it is ‘ to hold a default judgment hearing to establish
Selkudgc L Gimme er ((1
SK 2070 CV 76} M
Memorandum Opinion and Order 2022 VI SUPER
Pace 7 of l2
the amount of damages 61 V I at 346 (intetnai quotes and citations, omitted) (footnote omitted)
Howeve: a default judgment can be entered without a heating ‘ [W ]hen the plaintiffs claim against
a defendant is for a sum celtain or for a sum which can by computation be made certain Appleton
t Hairtgan 61 V I 262 270 (V I 20%) (Citing Super Ct R 48(za.)(I))‘6 see V I R CIV P
55(b)(1) ( If the pEaintiff‘s claim is for a sum certain 01 a sum that can be made cettain by
computation the court or the clerk on the ptaintiffs request, with an affidaxit showing the
amount due must enter judgment for that amount and costs against a defendant who has been
defaulted for not appealing and who is neither a minor nor an incompetent person ) In Hm rtgan
the Virgin Islands Supreme Court exptatned that [a] claim is not a sum certain unless theze is no
doubt as to the amount to which a plaintiff is entitled as a result of the defendant 5 default 7 61
V I at 270 In alt othet cases [not inxohing a claim for a sum certain}, the party must apply to
the court for a default The court may conduct hearings or make tefenals‘ preserving any
statutmy right to a ju1y ttial when to enter ()1 effectuate judgment it needs to (A) conduct an
accounting; (B) determine the amount of damages (C) establish the truth of any allegation by
exidence or (D) imestigate any other matter ’ V I R CW P 55(b)(2)
" The Hartman court noted
We again look to federal ease hm lo: persuasixe authority bLLflUbL wen thouOh Superiot Conn Rule 48
exclusixeiy youths default indoment in the Superior Court Federal RuEe 0t Ch i1 Proeedute 55(b) simikariy
ptmides thatdetaultjudgmemean he euteled without ahearingonEy where the damages somtht are a
sum eertain §Lt>i~R CT R 48(a)( I)( When the pEaintift 5 claim against a defendant is tor a sum eettain or
ten a sum whieh am by eomputdtion be made eertain the eterk upon request of the plaintift shah enter
judgment torthe metamountdue and Loans against the deiendant ) FED R CW P 35(b)(]}( It the plaintiffs
elaim i5 lo: a sum eettain or a sum that eat] be made eertain b) eomputation the clerk must emu judoment
for that amount and emu» against a detendant ) )
61 VI at 270 n 9
9mm. Humgan the Virgin Islands Supreme Court adopted the Virgin Ishmds Rufes of Civil Procedure whieh went
into effect on Maid} 31 2017 Subseqmntly Supefior Court Rule 48 was repealed on Aprii 7 2017 by Supreme Court
P1 omuloation Order No 20E? 0006 While Superior Court Rule 48 has been repeated and the Fatima! Rules of CM]
Ptoeedure does not appEy in this matte] the Court nevertheless finds the Hamgau ecu” s anaIysis as to sum eertain
elaims helptuI here since RuEe 55(b}[1) elosd) mirrors its federal eounterpart and Superior Court Rule 48
See cupid footnote 3
Sellmdge I G; et M er «I
gi£2ign€xhzfiépimon and Order 2022 VI SUPER M
Page 801 12
DISCUSSION
‘1 12 In his motion Plaintiff moved for an entry of default and defaultjudgment Plaintiff argued
that an entry of default judgment against Defendants is warranted and requested a default
judgment be entered ordering rescission of the Warranty Deed and upon such rescission Plaintiff
is the fee simple 0v» net of all right title and interest to the [Ptopelty] for attomey s fees and costs
inculred in piosecuting this matter and such further relief as this Court may deem just and proper
(Motion p 5 ) A copy of the proofs 01 setvice for Defendants weie attached to Plaintiff s motion
for as Exhibit I According to the proofs of service Defendants were serVed on Octobei l 2021
at 9315 Bardeen Way Iowa Colony Texas via Dwight Greene (Dec 16 2021 Motion Exhibit
1 )
A Entry of Default
‘11 13 Heie Defendants were sewed with a copy of the fiist amended complaint on Octobei l
2021 and as of the date 01 this memorandum opinion and order Defendants have not appeared 01
filed a response thereto As such the Court finds that Defendants have tailed to plead or othem ise
defend and that tailu1e is shown by affidaVit 01 otherwise Accordingly the Court will giant
Plaintiff s request for entry 01 detault and entei default against Defendants See VI R CIV P
55(21)
B Default Judgment
1 Whether Plaintiff is Entitled to a Judgment by Default
‘11 14 The fitst amended complaint alleged a single count for deed iescission To detetmine
whether Plaintiff is entitled to a default judgment ordering deed iescission the Court must first
determine whether the facts as alleged in Plaintiff s complaint constitute a legitimate cause of
action for deed rescission See King 1 Appleton 61 V I at 346
Selkndget Greene eta!
8X 2026 CV 76E
\Iemorandum Opinion and Order 2022 VI SUPER S k2-
Page 9 01 12
‘J[ 15 Plaintiff made the following allegations in its complaint
5 Plaintiff was the sole owner of No 20 Building E The Towers Condominium, Rem
Parcel No 2 Estate Contant, 7A Southside Quartet, St Thomas US Vitgin Islands
( Property ) See Exhibit 1, Warranty Deed
6 Platntiff inadvertently comeyed the property by Warranty Deed to Defendants on
October I4 2016
7 Plaintiff s intent was to keep the Ptoperty in his name and to add the Defendants as
additional gtantees who would then receixe the property as joint tenants with rights of
suwivorship upon his death
8 Plaintiff misunderstood the language of the Warranty Deed that was drafted and
executed it comeying the ploperty entiteiy t0 Defenciants
9 Defendants have tefused to com ey the Propetty back to Piaintitf
10 Defendants ate improperly withholding the property that was inctciveitently conveyed
to them
Count I (DEED RESCISSION)
1 1 Plaintiff repeats and lealleges all proceeding pazagraphs which are incorporated hetein
by refetence
12 PEaintiff intended to add the Defenéants as giantees on the deed and to convey a
survivorship interest to them upon his death
13 Plaintiff misunderstood the Eartguage of the deed as dtafted and signed it without fully
understanding the meaning and intent of the deed ie that he was dixesting his entire
interest
14 Plaintiff e misunderstanding and mistake had a materiat effect on the outcome of the
contract perfOImance in that he lost his entite intetest in the Property
£5 The conveyance of the deed to the Defendants is adverse to Plaintiff as it was not his
intent to transfet the Property to the Defendants without retaining a life estate
16 Enforcement of the deed would therefore he unconscionable
17 The deed must be rescinded or canceled to rest01e the status quo and tor Plaintiff to
tegain his, interest and become the fee simple 0w net of the Property
(Compl )
Stlkndget 0166116 8! (:1
SK 2020 CV 761
Memorandum Opinion and Order 2022 v1 SUPER “1mg“
Page 10 01 12
‘11 16 Based on the ailegations in the complaint it appears that Plaintiff is seeking the rescission
of a contract i e the deed based upon his unilateial mistake See Sn (31th I Undem (Md, 2021
VI 3 ‘11 24 (V1 2021) ( ‘A deed is acontract and thus in most ciicumstances the principles of
contract interpretation govern ) However, in his motion Plaintiff cited no authority and made no
substantive argument in support of its request Sec V I R Civ P ll(b)(5) ( By presenting to the
LOUlt a pleading, written motion 01 other paper whether by signing filing, submitting or later
advocating it an attorney 02 96” repiesented party certifies that to the best of the peisons
knowledge information and belief f01med after an inquiry reasonable under the
circumstances (5) that the applicable Virgin Islands law has been cited inciuding auth01ity for
and against the positions being advocated by the patty ) It is not the Coult's job to ieseaich and
construct legal alignments open to patties In ordel to develop a 1ega1 argument effectively the
facts at issue must be bolsteied by televant legal authority a perfunctory and undeveloped
asseition is inadequate VI T(IXtAssoucmoni West Indian Compam meed 2016VE LEXIS
170 4(Super Ct Oct 18 2016) (citing ChaIieH CBIAtqmsmom LLC 2016 VI LEXIS 62
27 I1 66) see also Joseph 1 Joseph 2015 V I LEXIS 43 5 (Super Ct Apr 23 2015) (the
Court Mil not make a mo» an: s arguments for him when he has failed to do so) Furthermme a
eursOIy reView of the piecedents. in the V11 gin I§1ancLs addressing matters related to contract
rescission reV eaied that a Banks analysis is necessaiy to determine whethei the soundest iule of
hm for the Virgin Islands is to tecognize a claim for rescission based upon unilaterai mistake and
if so a Bank: analysis is necessary to determine the soundest elements f0: a claim of rescission
based upon unilateral mistake in the Virgin Isiands See Banks 1 Internanonal Rental & Lcmmg
Corp , 55 V I 967 977 78 (V I 2011)‘ see also Gm tofthe Virgin Islands L Connor 60 V I 597
(V I 2.014) [Wlhile only the Superior Court is obligated to conduct Banks analyses parties are
Selkudge 1 (1169116 er «I
§X 2020 CV 761
Memorandum Opinion and Order 2022 VI SUPER L
Path 11 01 12
required to contribute to the analysis by citing to authority that is binding upon this Conn or to
authoxity that is presented as persuasive when faced with questions of law that lack precedent
Lembatlzi AntillesSch [m 2015 VI LEXIS 35 at 53(VI Super Ct Apt 7 2015) As such
Plaintiff s deficient tequest tor a default judgment Oideting deed iescission is not properly before
the Count and the Court is inclined to deny it See VI Tm Association 2016 V I LEXIS 170 at
4 (the Court found that the plaintiff s motions were not ptoperly before the Court because they
were dexoid of any legal basis to supp01t its propositions and therefore denied both motions)
However in the interests of judicial economy rather than deny Plaintiff s request for a default
judgment and have Plaintiff file a subsequent motion for default judgment the Court wi11 Oidei
Plaintiff to supplement his request for a defauit judgment ordering deed rescission and ieserVe
ruling thereto
CONCLUSION
‘11 17 Based on the foregoing the Couit wi11 (i) grant Plaintiff s request for entry of default
against Defendant and enter default against Defendants and (ii) Oldel Plaintiff to supplement his
request 1‘01 defaultjudgment Oldeiing deed rescission and reseive ruling thereto ALLOldiI‘lgly it is
hereby
ORDERED that Plaintiff s request for ent1 y of default is GRANTED and DEFAULT IS
ENTERED against Defendants And it is ftuther ,
ORDERED that within ninety (90) days from the date of entry of this Memorandum
Opinion and Order Plaintiff shall file a supplemental brief as to his iequest for detaultjudgment
ordering deed rescission Plaintiff s supplemental brief shall include substantive arguments and
citations to proper legal authority statute or mic and contribute to the Banks analysis by citing to
authority that is binding upon this Couit or to authority that is presented as persuasive when faced
Selkrzdge \ Greene e! a]
§X 7020 CV 76]
\[emorandum Opinion and Order 2022 V I SUPER I g; 2
Pam. 12 of 12
with questions of law that lack precedent The Court will RESERVE ruling on Plaintiff s tequest
for default judgment ordering deed rescission pending receipt of Plaintiff s supplemental brief
Failure f0] Plaintiff to comply will remit in Plaintiff 5 request for default judgment ordering deed
rescission being denied
DONE and so ORDERED this
g“ day of F&bmfg 2022
ATTEST %‘/%/V 7/4/26
/
Tamaxa Charles HAROLD W L WILLOCKS
Clerk of the C0 t Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
By 4342:1147/
C0 11 Clezk Mr F
Dated 5;? y fizz