IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS

DIVISION OF ST. CROIX



Mary A, WEEKES A/K/A MARY A. WEEKS,



PLAINTIFF, SX-16-CV-348

Vv.

ACTION FOR DEBT AND

KALANI K., JOHN A/K/A KALANI K. THOMAS, FORECLOSURE OF MORTGAGE

DEFENDANT.

MEMORANDUM OPINION



THIS MATTER came before the Court on Plaintiff Mary A. Weekes a/k/a Mary A. Weeks’



(hereinafter “Plaintiff’) motion for default judgment, filed on January 24, 2017.

BACKGROUND



Plaintiff commenced a lawsuit against Defendant Kalani K. John a/k/a Kalani K. Thomas

(hereinafter “Defendant”) and alleged the following in her complaint, filed on June 2, 2016:



On June 13, 2008, Defendant executed a mortgage note in the amount of $27,000.00 in favor



of Plaintiff and Thomas Pamphile a/k/a Thomas Pamphille.! (Compl. J 4) On the same date,



Defendant also simultaneously executed a purchase money mortgage to secure the payment



of the indebtedness with the following property: Plot 499 Estate Work & Rest, Queen



Quarter, St. Croix U.S. Virgin Islands, consisting of 0.2332 U.S. acre, more or less, as more



fully shown on Drawing No. 4624, dated July 20, 1990.* (Id.) Thomas Pamphile a/k/a



Thomas Pamphille died on January 5, 2011.3 (Id. at ¢ 6) Despite numerous reminders by



Plaintiff, Defendant remains in default of the obligations under the mortgage note and the



purchase money mortgage. (Id. at J] 7-10) As of the date of filing of the complaint, the



outstanding balance under the mortgage note is $17,477.20. (Id. at | 12)



Plaintiff sought to recover unpaid principal, accrued interest, costs, reasonable attomeys’

fees, judgment of foreclosure, and any other relief the Court may deem equitable and just. When

Defendant failed to file a response to Plaintiff's complaint, Plaintiff filed a motion for an entry of



default. The Court granted Plaintiff's request and an entry of default was entered against Defendant



1 A copy of the mortgage note was attached to the complaint as Exhibit 2.

2 A copy of the purchase money mortgage was attached to the complaint as Exhibit 2.

3 A copy of Thomas Pamphile a/k/a Thomas Pamphille’s death certificate was attached as Exhibit 3.

Weeks v. Thomas

SX-2016-CV-348

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Page 2 of 4



in this matter on January 12 2017. On January 24, 2017, Plaintiff filed this instant motion. To date,

Defendant has not appeared in this matter.

STANDARD OF REVIEW



Entry of default and default judgment are separate matters under Superior Court Rules 47 and

48. In King v. Appleton, 61 V.I. 339, 346 (V.I. 2014), the Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands

(hereinafter, “Supreme Court”) instructed that “after entering the default, the Superior Court must

consider whether the unchallenged facts constitute a legitimate cause of action, since a party in

default does not admit mere conclusions of law.” (internal quotations omitted). The Supreme Court

explained that a defendant, “by his default, admitted the plaintiff's well-pleaded allegations of fact,

[he] is concluded on those facts by the judgment, and is barred from contesting the facts thus

established.” Jd. In other words, a defendant's default does not in itself warrant the court to enter a

default judgment. Jd. (“the mere fact of [the defendant’s] default did not entitle [the plaintiff] to the

entry of a default judgment against [the defendant]; instead, [the defendant’s] default only conceded

the facts as alleged in [the plaintiff's] complaint”). Rather, “[t]here must be a sufficient basis in the

pleadings for the judgment entered.” Jd. Thus, if the court finds the facts, as alleged in the

plaintiff's complaint, constituted a valid cause of action under the Virgin Islands law, the court is to

hold a hearing to establish the amount of damages. Id.; see also, Appleton v. Harrigan, 61 V.1. 262,

269 (V.I. 2014) (after entry of default, damages generally must be established in an evidentiary

proceeding [where] the defendant is afforded the opportunity to contest the amount claimed)

(internal quotations and citations omitted).



However, such a hearing is not required “[w]hen the plaintiff's claim against a defendant is

for a sum certain or for a sum which can by computation be made certain.” Harrigan, 61 V.1. at 270

(citing Super. Ct. R. 48(a)(1)). The Supreme Court explained that, “[a] claim is not a sum certain

unless there is no doubt as to the amount to which a plaintiff is entitled as a result of the defendant's



default.” (citation omitted). Harrigan, 61 V.I. at 270. In Harrigan, the Supreme Court found the

Weeks v. Thomas

SX-2016-CV-348

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Page 3 of 4



damage claimed therein—namely, unpaid rent—did not qualify as a sum certain because sum certain

for the purposes of Superior Court Rule 48 “contemplates a situation in which, once liability has

been established, there can be no dispute as to the amount due, as in actions on money judgments and

negotiable instruments.” Jd. (internal quotations and citation omitted).

DISCUSSION



In her motion, Plaintiff alleged that as of November 1, 2016, Defendant owes Plaintiff

$17,477.20 under the mortgage note and $2,730.00 for attorney’s fees and costs for bringing this

action. (Motion, p. 6) Accordingly, Plaintiff requested the Court to enter a default judgment in favor

of Plaintiff for: (1) $17,477.20; plus (2) $2,730.00; plus (3) any other relief the Court may deem just

and proper.



I. Whether Plaintiff is Entitled to a Judgment by Default



The Court will first determine whether the facts, as alleged in Plaintiff’s complaint, constitute

a legitimate cause of action. According to Plaintiff’s complaint, on June 13, 2008, Defendant

executed and delivered a mortgage note (hereinafter “Note”) and a purchase money mortgage

(hereinafter “Mortgage”’) in the amount of $27,000.00 in favor of Plaintiff and Thomas Pamphile

a/k/a Thomas Pamphille. (Compl. J 4) A copy of the Note and the Mortgage were attached to the

complaint as exhibits, both dated June 13, 2008 and signed by Defendant. (Compl. Ex. 2) Plaintiff

alleged that, notwithstanding her demands, Defendant remained in default of the obligations under

the Note and the Mortgage. More specifically, Plaintiff alleged that Defendant owed Plaintiff in the

total amount of $17,477.20 under the Note. (Compl. § 12) Based on the foregoing, the Court finds

that these unchallenged facts constitute a legitimate cause of action for debt.



The Court must now determine whether a hearing is necessary to establish the amount of

damages. Here, Plaintiff failed to submit any proof to support its assertion that $17,477.20 remains

outstanding under the Note. Thus, Plaintiffs claim for the total amount owed under the Note does



not qualify as a sum certain because a sum certain requires that “there is no doubt as to the amount to

Weeks v. Thomas

SX-2016-CV-348

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Page 4 of 4



which [Plaintiff] is entitled as a result of [Defendant’s] default.” Harrigan, 61 V.I. at 270. In other

words, this is not a situation in which there can be no dispute as to the amount due under the Note.

Thus, an evidentiary hearing is necessary to establish the amount of damages in this matter. See

King, 61 V.I. at 346; Harrigan, 61 V.I. at 269.



While the Court finds the facts, as alleged in Plaintiff's complaint, constituted a valid cause

of action under the Virgin Islands law, the Court cannot enter a judgment until after the evidentiary

hearing has been held.



Il. Whether Plaintiff is Entitled to Attorney’s Fees and Costs



Plaintiff also filed a statement of costs and expenses for attorney’s fees and costs incurred in

this matter, although no motion for the same appears in the record. In light of the fact that an

evidentiary hearing is necessary in this matter, the Court will reserve ruling on Plaintiff's request for

attorney’s fees and costs until after the evidentiary hearing has been held.



CONCLUSION



Based on the foregoing reasons, the Court will schedule an evidentiary hearing to establish

the amount of damages in this matter. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will

follow.



i

DONE and so ORDERED this i day of February, 2017.



ATTEST:

Estrella H. George is HAROLD W.L. WILLOCKS /

Acting Clerk of the Court Administrative Judge of the Superior Court



t