SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
                             DIVISION OF ST CROIX

SILVER JACKSON,

                            PLAINTIFF,
                                               SX 14 CV 092
                       v
                                               ACTION FOR DAMAGES FAILURE
UNITED INDL'STRIAL WORKERS 0F SEAFARFs         T0 REPRESENT
INTERNATIONAL UNION AFL C10

                             DEFENDANT



                                         ORDER

                                                                        trial Workers of
        THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant United Indus
                                                               ment filed on May 18
Seafares International Union AFL C10 3 Motion tor Summary Judg
                                                                 2017 In accordance with
2016 The PlaintiffSilver Jackson filed an Opposition on March 1

the Memorandum Opinion of even date it is hereby
                                                                       International Union
        ORDERED that Defendant United Industrial Workers of Seatares

AFL C10 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED It is further

        ORDERED that this matter is CLOSED It is further
                                                                        d on all parties
        ORDERED that this Order and the ermdum Opinion be serve

        DONE and so ORDERED this L8 day of February 2020


my /
Tamara C I"
                                   MM      H    OLD W      WILLOCKS
Clerk oft /’ c A r                       fl esiding Judge of the Superior Court

By       1/]  ,  A [11/
          ou " e” 1' ’ ’

Dated        /1       3/1.!
                                                             ISLANDS
                   SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN
                           DIVISION OF ST CROIX

SILVER JACKSON,

                                PLAINTIFF,
                                                   SX 14 CV 092
                        V
                                                   ACTION FOR DAMAGES FAILURE
                                             Es    TO REPRESENT
UNITED INDLSTRIAL WORKERS 0F SEAFAR
INTERNATIONAL UNION AFL C10
                                                   Cited as 2020 VI SUPER 028 U
                                 DEFENDANT



Appearances

Eszart A Wynter, Sr , Esq
Law Office of Eszart A Wynter Sr P C
St Croix USVI
For the Plamtzjf

John J Merchant, Esq
United Industrial Workers ofthe Seatares
St CroiX USVI
For the Defendant

                                 MEMORANDUM OPINION

WILLOCKS Presiding Judge
                                                         ndant United Industrial Workers of
       THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defe
                                                                                      ment
                                             einafter Union ) Motion for Summary Judg
 Seafares International Union AFL C10 (her
                                                      tiff Silver Jackson (hereinafter
 (hereinafier   Motion ) filed on May 18 2016 The Plain

                                                   sition ) on March I 2017
  Plaintiff ) filed an Opposition (hereinafter Oppo

                                        BACKGROUND

                                                            the Plaintiff began working for the
        According to the Complaint on October 6 2006
                                                   ernment ) with the Department of Human
 Government of the Virgin Islands (hereinafter Gov
                                                                        tionship between    the
 Services (hereinafier       DHS ) (Compl if 6 ) Sometime later the rela

                                                  As a result on December 19 2011 the Plaintiff
 Plaintiffand her employer began to deteriorate

                                                    ended for one week (Id {I 24 ) The Union as
 was informed that her employment would be susp
Silwr Jackson \ l nion                                                                        2020 \l SUN—ROB U
SX 14 CV 092
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Page 2 ol 6

                                                             rnment employees including the Plaintiff
the exclusive bargaining representative for all Gove
                                                                                                   the
                                                      tiffs termination (Id 1i 10 ) On June 1 2012
filed ademand for arbitration due to the Plain

                                                           n had been withdrawn without (Id T 10)
Plaintiff learned that the demand for arbitratio
                                                            laint alleging that the Union breached the
Consequently the Plaintiff filed the present Comp
                                                          under the Collective Bargaining Agreement
contract and its duty of fair representation

 (hereinafter CBA )between the parties

                                        STANDARD OF REVIEW

                                                                        Virgin Islands Rule ofCivil Procedure
 $17       Motions for summary judgment are governed by

                                                                  ted     ifthe movant shows that there is no
 56 I A motion for summary judgment shall be gran
                                                                    nt is entitled to judgment as a matter of
 genuine dispute as to any material fact and the mova
                                                                  t the outcome of the suit under the
 law          As to materiality only those facts that might affec

                                                                        ary judgment      3
 governing law will properly preclude the entry of summ
                                                                                out to the court that there is no
 HS           ‘The moving party bears the initial burden of pointing
                                                                        an absence of evidence to support the
  genuine issue of material fact #or in other words
                                                     has the burden of setti                        ng out specific
  nonmoving party 5 case 4 The non moving party then
                                                                         consider the cited materials and other
  facts showing a genuine issue for trial 5 The court may
                                                                 ence or determine the credi                bility
  materials in the record 6 But the court may not weigh the evid
                                                         ence in the light most favo                   rable to the
  of witnesses 7 The Court must consider the record evid
                                                  fthat the evidence in the                     summary judgment
  non moving party 8 The court must satisfy itsel


  /
   ‘ V l R Cit P 56                                                                            ent
                                                VI Li-XlS >71 >75 (VI 2018)( A summary judgm
     V1 R Ci» P 36(3) see Rymer \ [\maII(orp 68                                    a triahle issue of
                                                                  ant can demonstrate the absence ot
   mm ant is entitled to judgment as a matter ot law it the mo»                                            see
                                                           n 60 V l 768 794 (V l 2014) (citations omitted)
   material tact in the record ) see also it alters \ ”whe
                                                          s     ed)
   also ”aim“ Martin 34 V1 ’79 387 t2010)(citation omitt
       Rymer 68 V I lLXlS >75
                                                2008) [citations omitted)
   4 Williams t [Hired Corp 50 V l 191 194 (V l
   5 Rymu 68 V   I LEXl S D73 76
   6 VI R (,i\ P >6(c)(3)
   7 See It ill/arm 30 V I at 194 93
   R Rymer 68 V I lFXIS 576
Silye/ lac/cw)!“ (man
                                                                                           2020\lSl IIROZSL
SX 14 CV 092
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Page a 01 6

                                                                                              should only grant
record supports this relief 9 Summarvjudgment is a drastic remedy a court
                                                                 materials on file and
summary judgment when the pleadings the discovery and disclosure

any affidavits show there is no genuine issue as to any material fact                  ‘0
                                                                                                  (Count I) and
         In the Complaint the Plaintiff alleges hybrid claims breach of contract
                                                                                            held that in order to
breach of fair representation The Supreme Court ofthe Virgin Islands has
                                                                                            elements for both a
succeed under hybrid claims the plaintiff/employer must establish all the

breach of contract and breach of duty of fair representation 1'
                                                DISCUSSION

 A Breach of Contract
                                                                                                            of the
         The Union claims that summary judgment is appropriate because its withdrawal
                                                                            the Union as the
 Plaintiff‘s grievance did not constitute a breach of contract According to
                                                                                                        to decide
 exclusive bargaining representative of DHS employees it has the broad discretion
                                                                                           However the Plaintiff
 how to pursue an employee 5 grievance against an employer (Mot at 3 )
                                                                                            Plaintiff s grievance
 contends that although the Union acknowledges that it abandoned the
                                                                                               failure to contact
 claims there are still genuine issues of material fact as to whether the Union

 the Plaintiff prior to settling her grievance constitutes a breach of contract
                                                                                                            was an
              To succeed on a breach of contract claim a plaintiff must Show that (I) there
                                                                                 as a breach of that duty and
 agreement (2) a duty yy as created by that agreement (3) there w

  (4) damages resulted '



  1lan/upoolt (1m loft/re I I 
63 VI 36
) 383 (VI 2013)
  ‘0 Scc Rymer ()8 V l l I XIS 575 see also Harlin 54 V1 at 386
                                                                                    V l l EXIS 200 at *7 (Super
  ll JOchh 34 V l 416:: Sec (nisar \ lmerlcan l-echa/rrm ofTeachers 2016
                                                                  bland:   882F2d    733 737(JCI Cir 1989)( [A]n
  (t V1 Dcc : 2016)(citing (low I (miernmcmoflirgin
                                                    must  bring  both a claim against the public cmploy er tor breach
  employ cc proceeding under 24 V l ( § 361 383
                                            for breach of fair reprcsentation simultaneously   The cmploy ee may it
  of contract and a claim against the union
                                                                                   the same \t hethcr he sues onc thc
  he chooses sue one defendant and not the other but the case hc must proye is
  othcr or both )
                                                                                     DL/ Wong (api/u/ Inc 67
   ‘ Phl/llp‘ Walsh Monsanto 6()\ l 612 6210 l 2017)(citing BIOIli/laldI
  V1788 7980120131
Silver Jackson \ ( man
5X 14 CV 092                                                                2020 V1 SUPl-R 028 U
MEMORANDUM OPIMON
Page 6 016

in determining whether to pursue an employee 5 grievance deciding not to continue with a

grievance does not limit one s procedural right when the Union has reasonable basis Here it is

evident that the Union 5 decision was reasonable given the evidence it obtained during

discovery Moreover the Union failure to inform the Plaintiff personally does not constitute

bad faith as a mere oversight does not rise to a level of unreasonableness to constitute a breach

of fair representation Thus the Plaintiff has failed to establish that the Union 5 decision was

arbitrary or done in bad faith Therefore there is no genuine issue as to any material tact

regarding part two of Plaintiffs hybrid claim As a result summary judgment in favor oi the

Union is appropriate as it has established that there are no genuine issues as to any material

facts regarding both hybrid claims

                                        CONCLUSION

        Having determined that summary judgment is appropriate as to both the claim ofbreach

ofcontract and breach of fair representation summary judgment will be granted in favor ofthe

Union Consequently the Plaintiffs Complaint shall be dismissed An order consistent with

this memorandum opinion shall follow

        DONE and so ORDERED this Ed” of February 2020



ATTEST                                    WM 7&1 %M
Tamara Charles                                 HAROLD W L WILLOCKS
Clerk ofthe Court                              Presiding Judge of the Superior Court

By
         Court Clerk Supervisor

Dated