We have been successful in representing our clients in the following cases:
Eddy . Virgin Islands and Water Power Authority, 369 F.d 227 (2004). Held: Claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress barred by workers compensation law.
McCauley v. University of the Virgin Islands, 52 V.I. 816, 618 F.3d 232 (3d Cir. 2010). Held: that The University of the Virgin Islands is an arm or alter ego of the Government of the Virgin Island and as such is immune from liability for claims brought under Section 1983. Neither the Virgin Islands government, nor its employees acting in their official capacities, are “persons” for purposes of liability under Section 1983, Since the Virgin Islands government is not a “person,” entities functioning as “arms” or “alter egos” of the territory will be similarly immune from liability under Section 1983. Additionally, Governmental officials who are sued in their official and individual capacities under Section 1983 are considered “persons” and therefore are immune from liability. .
Davis. Ragster, 50 V.I. 964 (D.V.I. 2008). Held: Plaintiff could not succeed on a claim of deprivation of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment with respect to termination of a specific employment position because she could not establish a property interest in the employment. To have a property interest in a job or job benefit, an employee must have a legitimate claim of entitlement, not just a unilateral expectation. Plaintiff as a fixed-term employee of the University has no property interest in continued employment beyond the expiration date of the fixed term.
In re Kendall, 55 V.I. 888 (V.I.S.C. 2011): Held: People prove judge guilty of contempt.
V.I. Public Services Commission v. V.I. Water and Power Authority, 49 V.I.478 (V.I.S.C. 2008). Held: The power of Public Services Commission is limited to setting the rates of the Water and Power Authority.
Malloy v. Government Employment Retirement System, 30 V.I. 164 (D.V.I. 1994). Held: defendants required to show good cause why permanent injunction should not issue requiring defendants to comply with statute requiring them to provide retired employees with annual reports as required by law.
Ingvolstad v. Young, 19 V.I. 115 (D.V.I. 1982). Held: Two year statute of limitations applies to claim for legal malpractice where claim for recovery is based on negligence.