SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 
QUEEN'S RIDGE CONDOMINIUM 
ASSOCIATION, INC., 
PLAINTIFF, 
v. 
TROND OSTHAUG, 
DEFENDANT. 
Appearances: 
Semaj I. Johnson, Esq. 
KA Rames, P.C. 
Christiansted, U.S. Virgin Islands 
For Plaintiff 
Jeffrey Moorhead, Esq. 
Christiansted, U.S. Virgin Islands 
For Defendant 
Civil No. SX-2014-CV-355 
ACTION FOR DEBT AND 
FORECLOSURE 
CITE As: 2022 vIsUPER_O 
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 
WILLOCKS, Administrative Judge 
,r I 
THIS MATTER is before the Court for review sua sponte. 
BACKGROUND 
,r 2 
On August 28, 2014, Plaintiff Queen's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. (hereinafter 
"Plaintiff') filed a complaint against Defendant Trond Osthaug (hereinafter "Defendant") in an 
action for debt and foreclosure. In the complaint, Plaintiff alleged: (i) Plaintiff is a condominium 
association, (ii) Defendant is an owner of Unit No, 1 1 3 of the Queen's Ridge Condominium in St. 
Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands (hereinafter "Property") and is subject to "the Declaration of 
Condominium dated March 30, 1990," (ii) Defendant "has failed and refused to the mandatory 
assessments applicable" and "is in violation of the Condominium law and Bylaws," (iv) Defendant 
"was notified of his delinquency via certified mail dated September 18, 2013," (v) Defendant "was 
Queen 's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. v. Osthaug 
SX-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page 2 of IO 
o scree YD 
further notified of his delinquency via the filing of a lien with the Virgin Islands Record of Deeds 
dated October 13, 2013," and (vi) "Defendant is currently in arrears in the amount of$55,128.75 as 
of June 30, 2014." (Comp!.) In tum, Plaintiff sought for: () a judgment in favor of Plaintiff and 
against Defendant for "all additional sums which plaintiff may incur to protect the security of the 
property," (ii) an order "directing that the property be sold at Marshal's sale in accordance with the 
law" with the proceeds "applied first to the priority mortgage regarding the property," (iii) an order 
"directing that [Defendant] surrender possession of the property," (iv) an order "of costs to 
[P]laintiffin this action including reasonable attorney's fees, and (v) an order "awarding [P]laintiff 
such other and further relief as the Court may deem equitable and just." (Compl.) 
'II 3 
Defendant filed an answer in response. In his answer, Defendant stated that he has been 
paying towards the deficiency and disputed the amount claimed. 
ii 4 
On March 13, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. In response, Defendant 
filed an opposition and Plaintiff filed a reply thereafter. 
5 
On July 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed a request for ruling on its motion for summary judgment. 
'II 6 
On February 2, 20 I 8, the Court entered an order whereby the Court noted that Defendant's 
opposition to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment stated that mediation is needed and ordered 
the parties to mediation. On May 25, 2018, a mediation report was filed whereby the mediator 
indicated that a mediation conference was held on May 16, 2018 and that this matter was recessed 
until June 7, 2018 for the next mediation conference. 1 
7 
On August 22, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for ruling on its motion for summary judgment. 
1 The Court must point out that, while the May 25, 2018 mediation report indicated that the second mediation conference 
was scheduled for June 7, 2018, no further mediation report was filed in this matter. Nevertheless, in light of Plaintiffs 
August 22, 2022 motion for ruling on its motion for summary judgment, the Court concludes that this matter was not 
resolved by mediation. 
Queen 's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. v. Osthaug 
SX-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page 3 of IO 
DISCUSSION 
o22 scree D 
8 
The Court must note at the outset that Plaintiff's motion failed to include a statement of 
undisputed facts in support of his motion as required under Rule 56 of the Virgin Islands Rule of 
Civil Procedure (hereinafter "Rule 56").2 See V.I. R. CIV. P. 56(c)(l)-(2) (requiring the movant to 
include a statement of undisputed facts supported by affidavit(s) or citations identifying specifically 
the location(s) of the material(s) in the record relied upon regarding such fact, and the opposing 
party to respond to the statement of undisputed facts). The Court must further note that, while 
Defendant filed an opposition, Defendant did not address the merits of Plaintiff's motion; Defendant 
simply argued that it was premature and should be denied due to noncompliance with the mediation 
requirement under Title 28 V.I. C. § 53 l(b).3 The Court also notes that Defendant has had ample 
opportunity to move for leave to file an opposition to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. In 
fact, despite the fact that Plaintiff has filed two separate request/motion for ruling on its motion for 
Plaintiff filed its motion for summary judgment motion before March 31, 2017, the effective date of the Virgin Islands 
Rules of Civil Procedure, and therefore, filed the motion pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 
which applied to the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands through former Superior Court Rule 7. However, the Virgin 
Islands Rules of Civil Procedure now "govern ... proceedings in any action pending on the effective date of these rules 
or amendments, unless: (A) the Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands specifies otherwise by order; or (B) the Superior 
Court makes an express finding that applying them in a particular previous-pending action would be infeasible or would 
work an injustice." V.I. R. CIV. P. 1-1(c)(2). Here, the Supreme Court has not directed that the Virgin Islands Rules of 
Civil Procedure should not govern motions for summary judgment. Funhermore, the Court does not find that applying 
the new rules would be infeasible or work an injustice. At first glance, Rule 56 of the Virgin Islands Rules of Civil 
Procedure may initially appear to be more stringent that its federal counterpart due to its requirement of having the 
moving party file a statement of undisputed facts and therefore would work an injustice. However, upon review, there 
is evidence that a party moving for summary judgment on March 17, 2017 was required to include an itemization of 
undisputed facts, and thus, applying the new rules would not work an injustice. See Vanterpool v. Go't of the V.I, 63 
V.I. 563, 583 n.10 (V.I. 2015); see also, Martin v. Martin, 54 V.I. 379, 388-89 (V.I. 2010); FED. R. CIV. P. 56, Notes of 
Advisory Committee on 20 IO amendments. 
In his opposition, Defendant argued that Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is premature and should be denied. 
Defendant made the following assenions in support of his argument: (i) Plaintiff is in violation of Title 28 V.1. c. 
531(b) because the parties "have not conducted the required mediation and no good faith effort has been made by 
Plaintiff to resolve the issues involved in this dispute." (Opp. I); and (ii) "If the Court proceeds to decide summary 
judgment at this time it would 'significantly change the mediation dynamics so as to render mediation 'an empty 
formality to signal compliance with the statute."" (Id.) Title 28 V.I. C. § 531 provides that "[p]rior to the entry of any 
judgment of foreclosure, the parties must provide the Court with evidence that a good faith effort was made to settle the 
matter through mediation. The type and form of the mediation report shall be prescribed by the Superior Court of the 
Virgin Islands." Title 28 V.I. C. § 53 I(b). 
Queen 's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. • Osthaug 
$X-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page 4 of 10 
on» visurea D 
summary judgment-on July 17, 2017 and again on August 22, 2022-Defendant has not done 
anything to oppose Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. Nevertheless, Plaintiff's failure to 
include a statement of undisputed facts does not automatically render its motion fatally deficient 
and Defendant's failure to oppose Plaintiff's motion does not automatically result in summary 
judgment in favor of Plaintiff. See V.I. R. CIV. P. 56(e)(3) ("If a party fails to properly support an 
assertion of fact or fails to properly address another party's assertion of fact as required by Rule 
56(c), the court may: ... (3) grant summary judgment if the motion and supporting materials 
including the facts considered undisputed 
show that the movant is entitled to it ..."); see also, 
Martin, 54 V.I. at 388-89 (noting that the non-moving party's failure to oppose the motion for 
summary judgement "cannot, in and of itself, justify the grant of the motion"); Vanterpool Gov't of 
the Virgin Islands, 63 V.I. 563,583 (V.I. 2015). At this time, in the interest of judicial economy and 
efficiency, the Court will consider Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the merits. 
'In Marin. the Virgin Islands Supreme Court stated: 
Importantly, however, 
[s)ummary judgment will not be entered automatically if the non-moving party fails to file an 
opposition to the motion. Summary judgment may be granted only if it is approprate to do so. 
Consequently, although it is assuredly a dangerous practice to fail to oppose a summary judgment 
motion, even uncontested motions must be examined carefully by the [trial] court to determine 
whether no genuine issue of material fact remains and whether judgment is appropriate as a matter 
of law. The trial court may not accept as true the moving party's itemization of undisputed facts; 
instead, the court must satisfy itself that the evidence in the summary judgment record supports this 
relief. This does not necessarily require the court to review all evidentiary materials on file, but it must 
at least review those materials supporting the motion itself. Moreover, the [trial] court's order should 
recount that it addressed the underlying motion on its merits. 
STEVEN BAICKER-MCKEE ET AL., 2009 FEDERAL CIVIL RULES HANDBOOK 1093 (Thompson-West 2008). 
(Emphases added). See also FED. R. CIV. P. 56(e) ( "If the opposing party does not so respond, summary 
judgment should, if appropriate, be entered against that party." (emphasis added)); Anchorage Ass'n• VI Bd 
of Tax Review, 922 F.2d 168 (3d Cir. 1992) (holding that when non-movant fails to oppose motion for summary 
judgment trial court may assume truth of facts set forth in motion but may not deem motion conceded, because 
court must still inquire whether facts therein entitle movant to relief as a matter of law). 
54 V.l. at 388-89 (emphasis in original). 
Queen's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. v. Osthaug 
SX-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page 5 of 10 
ovsvre D 
9 
In its motion, Plaintiff argued that "there are no material issues of fact and [P]laintiff is 
entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law." (Motion 1.) Plaintiff made the following 
assertions in support of its argument: (i) Plaintiff "is a condominium association duly formed and 
existing pursuant to Virgin Islands law" and owns the condominium building Queen's Ridge 
Condominiums. (Id.); (ii) Defendant "at all times relevant hereto, was owner of Unit No. 1 1 3 of said 
Queen's Ridge Condominiums." (Id.; Exhibit A); (iii) "Defendant purchased the unit in 2006, and 
agreed to pay assessment levied by Plaintiff, as outlined in the Declaration of Condominium for 
Queen's Ridge, dated March 30, 1990." (Id., at 2; Exhibit B); (iv) In 2009, Defendant stopped 
paying his assessments and thus, Plaintiff recorded several liens on Defendant's unit. (Id., at 2; 
Exhibits C-E); and (v) As of February I, 2017, Defendant was "in arrears in the amount of 
approximately $39,776.74." (Id., at 2; Exhibit F.) 
10 
In its reply, Plaintiff outlined its further efforts to resolve this matter which was ultimately 
unsuccessful. 
A. Standard of Review 
1 1 
Rule 56 of Virgin Islands Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter "Rule 56") governs motions 
for summary judgment and sets forth the procedures thereto. Under Rule 56, "[a] party may move 
for summary judgment, identifying each claim or defense 
or the part of each claim or defense 
on which summary judgment is sought" and "[t]he court shall grant summary judgment 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 oflaw." V.I. R. CIV. P. 56; see, Rymer v. Kmart Corp., 68 V.I. 571,575 (V.I. 
2018) ("A summary judgment movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law if the movant can 
demonstrate the absence of a triable issue of material fact in the record."). "A factual dispute is 
deemed genuine if 'the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the 
Queen's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. v. Osthaug 
SX-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page 6 of IO 
o sure«_BO 
nonmoving party[,]"" and a fact is material only where it "might affect the outcome of the suit under 
the governing law[.]" Todman v. Hicks, 70 V.I. 430, 436 (V.1. Super. Ct. April 17, 2019) (quoting 
Williams v. United Corp., 50 V.I. 191, 194 (V.I. 2008)). The reviewing court must view all 
inferences from the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, and take the 
nonmoving party's conflicting allegations as true if properly supported. Kennedy Funding, Inc. v. 
GB Properties, Ltd., 2020 V.I. 5, {14 (V.I. 2020). "The movant may discharge this burden simply 
by pointing out to the . . . court that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's 
case." Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Once the moving party meets this burden, 
"the non-moving party then has the burden of set[ ting] out specific facts showing a genuine issue 
for trial." Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The non-moving party "may not rest 
upon mere allegations, [but] must present actual evidence showing a genuine issue for trial." Rymer, 
68 V.I. at 576 (quoting Williams v. United Corp., 50 V.I. 191, 194 (V.I. 2008)). "Such evidence may 
be direct or circumstantial, but the mere possibility that something occurred in a particular way is 
not enough, as a matter of law, for a jury to find it probably happened that way." Kennedy, 2020 
V.I. 5, 114. Moreover, the court "should not weigh the evidence, make credibility determinations, 
or draw 'legitimate inferences' from the facts when ruling upon summary judgment motions because 
these are the functions of the jury." Todman, 70 V.I. at 437 (quoting Williams, 50 V.I. at 197); see 
Kennedy, 
2020 V.I. 5, 14; see also, 
Rymer, 68 
V.I. at 
577 
("When considering 
a summary judgment motion, a trial judge may not weigh the credibility of evidence or witnesses."). 
In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court's role "is not to determine the truth, but rather 
to determine whether a factual dispute exists that warrants trial on the merits." Todman, 70 V.I. at 
437 (citations omitted); see Kennedy, 2020 V.I. 5, 14 (noting that the court "decide only whether 
there is a genuine issue for trial such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non-moving 
Queen 's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. v. Osthaug 
$X-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page 7 of 10 
on vises« 0 
party"). Accordingly, "if a credibility determination is necessary as to the existence of a material 
fact, a grant of summary judgment would be improper." Rymer, 68 V.I. at 577. Because summary 
judgment is "[a] drastic remedy, a court should only grant summary judgment when the 'pleadings, 
the discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any affidavits, show there is no genuine issue as 
to any material fact." Rymer, 68 V.I. at 575-76 (quoting Williams, 50 V.I. at 194). The Court is 
required to "state on the record the reasons for granting or denying the motion." V .I. R. CIV. P. 
56(a). 
A. Debt Claim 
1 1 2 
As noted in Carlos Warehouse v. Thomas, "no Virgin Islands precedent (binding or 
persuasive) explains what common law rule governs a claim for money owed" and thus, a Banks 
analysis was necessary to determine whether a debt claim should be recognized under the common 
law of the Virgin Islands and what specific rules should apply. 64 V.I. 173, 183-84 (V.I. Super. Ct. 
May 12, 2016). The Carlos Warehouse court conducted a Banks analysis and concluded that "it is 
unquestionably the soundest rule for the Virgin Islands to recognize a claim for debt," Id. at 192 
(quotation marks and internal citation omitted), and that "[t]o state a common law claim for debt 
under Virgin Islands law, the plaintiff must allege that the defendant owes a certain amount and that 
the defendant is or should be obligated to pay that amount." Id. Having reviewed the Banks analysis 
conducted in Carlos Warehouse, this Court sees no reason to depart from that ruling and adopts that 
analysis as though the same were set forth herein. 
13 
In this instance, the Court finds that Plaintiff satisfied its burden of establishing that there is 
no genuine dispute as to any material fact regarding the facts supporting each element of the debt 
claim. Plaintiff established the existence of an agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant for 
Defendant to pay assessments to Plaintiff-to wit, under the Declaration of Condominium for 
Queen 's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. v. Osthaug 
SX-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page 8 of IO 
2022 VI SUPER .ID- 
Queen's Ridge, upon Defendant's acceptance of the Warranty Deed for the Property, Defendant 
agreed to pay assessments to Plaintiff. (Compl.; Answer; Motion; Exhibit A-Warranty Deed for the 
Property, dated October 2, 2006, showing Defendant as the grantee; Exhibit B-Declaration of 
Condominium for Queen's Ridge, dated March 30, 1990;' Exhibit F-Plaintiffs Invoice to 
Defendant, dated February I, 2017.) Here, Defendant owes assessments to Plaintiff and has failed 
to pay. (Compl.; Answer.) Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as matter oflaw 
as to its debt claim against Defendant. However, as to the amount of the judgment, given that the 
invoice attached to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was dated February I, 2017, the Court 
will order Plaintiff to supplement its motion with a current itemized invoice of the outstanding 
assessments owed by Defendant to Plaintiff.6 
B. Foreclosure Claim 
14 
Based on the fact that Defendant owes Plaintiff outstanding assessments, the Court finds that 
Plaintiff is permitted to foreclose on the Property under Title 28 V.I.C. § 922(a)7 and Title 28 V.I.C. 
• The Declaration of Condominium for Queen's Ridge. dated March 30, 1990 provides in relevant part: 
6.1 Creation of Lien and Personal Obligation for Assessments. Each Unit Owner of a Unit, by acceptance of a 
deed to such Unit or other conveyance thereof, whether or not it shall be so expressed in such deed or other 
conveyance, shall be deemed to covenant and agree to pay to the Association: (I) annual assessments or 
charges...; and (ii) special assessments... 
15.10 Rights and Obligations. Each grantee of a Unit Owner, by acceptance of a deed of conveyance or other 
instrument of conveyance, accepts the same subject to all restrictions, conditions, covenants, reservations, 
liens, easements and charges, and all other provisions contained, created, or reserved by this Declaration. All 
rights, benefits and privileges of every character hereby imposed shall be deemed and taken to be convenants 
running with the land and shall bind any person having at any time any interest or estate in the Property or any 
portion thereof and shall inure to the benefit of the grantee in like manner as thought [sic] the provisions of this 
Declaration were recited and stipulated at length in each and every deed, contract or other instrument of 
conveyance. The provisions of this Declaration shall be binding upon all Persons having and acquiring any 
right, title or interest in the Property and their respective legal representatives, heirs, successors, successors-in­ 
title, and assigns and shall inure to the benefit of every Unit Owner, the Association, and the Declarant, and 
their respective legal representatives, heirs, successors, successors-in-title and assigns. 
In its August 22, 2022 motion, Plaintiff indicated that Defendant's debt to Plaintiff continues to accrue. (Aug. 22, 2022 
Motion L.) 
' Title 28 V.LC. $ 922(a) provides: 
Queen's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. • Osthaug 
SX-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page 9 of 10 
2022 vI SUPER_fil_ 
§ 531.
8 However, the Court cannot discern whether there are any other lien holders on the Property 
that need to be made a defendant in the action as required under Title 28 V.IC. $ 532.° As such, the 
Court will order Plaintiff to file a title search report of the Property. 
C. Costs (Including Attorneys' Fees) 
i! 15 
Plaintiff also requested costs and attorneys' fees incurred by Plaintiff in connection with this 
action. (Compl.; Motion) Rule 54 of the Virgin Islands Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter "Rule 
54") provides that "[w Ji thin 30 days after the entry of a final judgment or a judgment allowing costs, 
the prevailing party shall serve on the adverse party and file with the court a bill of costs, together 
with a notice of motion when application will be made to the court to tax the same." V.I. R. Civ. P. 
All sums assessed by the Association of Apartment Owners but unpaid for the share of the common expenses 
chargeable to any apartment shall constitute a lien on such apartment prior to all other liens except only (i) tax 
liens on the apartment in favor of the Government of the United States Virgin Islands, and (ii) all sums unpaid 
on a first mortgage of record. Such lien may be foreclosed by suit by the manager or Board of Directors, acting 
on behalf of the apartment owners, in like manner as a mortgage of real property. In any such foreclosure the 
apartment owner shall be required to pay a reasonable rental for the apartment, if so provided in the bylaws, 
and the plaintiff in such foreclosure shall be entitled to the appointment of a receiver to collect the same. The 
manager or Board of Directors, acting on behalf of the apartment owners, shall have the power, unless 
prohibited by the declaration, to bid in the apartment at foreclosure sale, and to acquire and hold, lease, 
mortgage and convey the same. Suit to recover a money judgment for unpaid common expenses shall be 
maintainable without foreclosing or waiving the lien securing the same. 
Title 28 V.I.C. $ 922(a). 
• Title 28 V.I.C. § 53l(a) provides: 
A lien upon real property, other than that of a judgment, whether created by mortgage or otherwise, shall be 
foreclosed, and the property adjudged to be sold to satisfy the debt secured thereby, by an action of an equitable 
nature. In such action, in addition to the judgment of foreclosure and sale, if it appears that a promissory note 
or other personal obligation for the payment of the debt has been given by the mortgagor or other lien debtor, 
or by any other person as principal or otherwise, the court shall also adjudge a recovery of the amount of such 
debt against such person or persons, as the case may be, as in the case of an ordinary judgment for the recovery 
of money. 
Title 28 V.I.C. § 53 l(a). 
Title 28 V.LC. $ 532 provides: 
Any person having a lien subsequent to the plaintiff upon the same property or any pan thereof, or who has 
given a promissory note or other personal obligation for the payment of the debt or any pan thereof, secured 
by the mortgage or other lien which is the subject of the action, shall be made a defendant in the action. Any 
person having a prior lien may be made defendant at the option of the plaintiff, or by the order of the court 
when deemed necessary."). 
Title 28 V.LC. $ 532. 
Queen 's Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. • Osthaug 
SX-2014-CV-355 
Memorandum Opinion and Order 
Page IO of IO 
2022 VI SUPER 
54( d)( I )(A). Accordingly, at this juncture, the Court will deny without prejudice Plaintiff's request 
for costs and attorneys' fees incurred by Plaintiff in connection with this action. However, Plaintiff 
may file a separate motion for costs and attorneys' fees, with proper briefing and supporting 
documents, in compliance with Rule 54. Failure to comply with Rule 54 may result in the costs and 
attorneys' fees being waived. See V.1. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1)(E) ("Upon failure of the prevailing party 
to comply with this Rule, all costs may be waived."). 
CONCLUSION 
16 
For the reasons stated above, the Court will order Plaintiff to file a current itemized invoice 
of the outstanding assessments owed by Defendant to Plaintiff and a title search report of the 
Property, and reserve entering an order and final judgment on Plaintiff's motion for summary 
judgment pending receipts of Plaintiff's supplementations. Accordingly, it is hereby: 
ORDERED that, within sixty (60) days from the date of the entry of this Order, Plaintiff 
shall file a current itemized invoice of the outstanding assessments owed by Defendant to Plaintiff 
and a title search report of the Property. 
DONE and so ORDERED this 
4 
\ T a y of September, 2022. 
ATTEST: 
Tamara Charles 
Clerk of the Court 
< %de.6tltd' 
Administrative Judge of the Superior Court 
By: 
Court Clerk Supervisor 
Dated: ------------- 
Sharisse A. Bascombe
September 22, 2022