DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN 
JAMES MARDENBOROUGH, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
COMMISSIONER SHARON ANN MCCOLLUM,  
CLARISSA WARRINGTON, and 
GOVERNMENT of the VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 
              Defendants. 
) 
) 
) 
 
) 
 
) 
Civil No. 2014-82 
) 
) 
) 
 
) 
) 
 
 
) 
) 
) 
) 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
Namosha Boykin 
Pedro K. Williams 
Law Office of Pedro K. Williams 
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. 
 
For the James Mardenborough, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Claude Walker, Attorney General 
Carol Thomas-Jacobs, AAG 
Aquannette Y. Chinnery, AAG 
Ariel Marie Smith-Francois, AAG 
Virgin Islands Department of Justice 
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. 
 
For the defendants.  
 
JUDGMENT1 
GÓMEZ, J. 
 
Before the Court is the motion of Commissioner Sharon Ann 
McCollum, Clarissa Warrington, and the Government of the Virgin 
Islands for summary judgment on all Counts of the Complaint. 
                                                          
1 The Court will issue a memorandum opinion outlining its reasons at a later 
date. 
Case: 3:14-cv-00082-CVG-RM   Document #: 162   Filed: 09/08/16   Page 1 of 3
Mardenborough v. Government of the Virgin Islands 
Civ. No. 14-82 
Order 
Page 2 
 
Summary judgment is appropriate “if the movant shows that 
there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the 
movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. 
P. 56(a); see also Hersh v. Allen Prods. Co., 789 F.2d 230, 232 
(3d Cir. 1986). 
The movant has the initial burden of showing there is no 
genuine issue of material fact, but once this burden is met it 
shifts to the non-moving party to establish specific facts 
showing there is a genuine issue for trial. Gans v. Mundy, 762 
F.2d 338, 342 (3d Cir. 1985).  The non-moving party “may not 
rest upon mere allegations, general denials, or ... vague 
statements.” Quiroga v. Hasbro, Inc., 934 F.2d 497, 500 (3d 
Cir. 1991).  “[T]here is no issue for trial unless there is 
sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party for a jury to 
return a verdict for that party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 
Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249 (1986). 
“[A]t the summary judgment stage the judge's function is 
not himself to weigh the evidence and determine the truth of the 
matter but to determine whether there is a genuine issue for 
trial.” Id.  In making this determination, this Court draws all 
reasonable inferences in favor of the opposing party. See Bd. of 
Educ. v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822, 850 (2002); see also Armbruster v. 
Unisys Corp., 32 F.3d 768, 777 (3d Cir. 1994). 
Case: 3:14-cv-00082-CVG-RM   Document #: 162   Filed: 09/08/16   Page 2 of 3
Mardenborough v. Government of the Virgin Islands 
Civ. No. 14-82 
Order 
Page 3 
 
 
The premises considered, it is hereby  
 
ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; it 
is further 
 
ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED; it is further 
 
ORDERED that all pending motions are MOOT; it is further  
 
ORDERED that the trial setting in this matter is VACATED;  
and it is further 
 
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case. 
 
 
 
 
  
 
                     S\  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
Curtis V. Gómez 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
District Judge 
 
Case: 3:14-cv-00082-CVG-RM   Document #: 162   Filed: 09/08/16   Page 3 of 3