Browne v. Gore
2012 V.I. Supreme LEXIS 68
Supreme Court of The Virgin Is...2012Background
- Gore filed a pro se FED action against Browne for delinquent rent at 85 Catherine’s Rest; Browne allegedly habitually paid late and failed to pay January–March 2010.
- A magistrate scheduled a July 20, 2010 FED hearing; Browne defaulted by not attending, resulting in a default judgment and eviction order.
- Gore also filed a small claims action; Browne attended that hearing pro se, and sought to reopen the FED case to contest on the merits.
- The magistrate held the July 21, 2010 federal hearing; the following day, the magistrate entered judgment for Gore and ordered Browne to vacate.
- Browne moved for stay and reconsideration in Aug. 2010; magistrate denied, citing lack of credibility and the potential applicability of the statute of frauds to any oral agreement.
- Browne filed a petition for internal review under Interim Rules; Rule 322 was adopted on Nov. 23, 2010 and governs internal review, with briefing requirements and scheduling to be set by Clerk or judge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 322 applies to Browne’s petition for internal review | Browne argues Rule 322 governs internal review. | Gore concedes Rule 322 applies. | Rule 322 applies; error to proceed under pre-Rule process without briefing schedule. |
| Whether the judge erred by adjudicating on the merits without a briefing schedule | Browne contends merits decision without briefs violated Rule 322. | Gore contends briefing was unnecessary. | Reversed; merits decision without proper briefing schedule improper. |
| Whether lack of notice of briefing schedule violated due process | Browne had no notice or timetable for briefing. | Gore argues no prejudice shown. | Remand with briefing schedule to ensure due process and proper briefing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lehtonen v. Payne, 57 V.I. 308 (V.I. 2012) (appeals from magistrate decisions; standard of review and final order appealability)
- Watts v. Two Plus Two, Inc., 54 V.I. 286 (V.I. 2010) (pro se briefing and prosecution duties; timing considerations under Rule 322)
- Molloy v. Independence Blue Cross, 56 V.I. 155 (V.I. 2012) (dilatoriness where court delays burden on party for briefing timelines)
- Fontaine v. People, 56 V.I. 571 (V.I. 2012) (rule amendments apply to pending cases; context for retroactivity of procedure rules)
- Hodge v. McGowan, 50 V.I. 296 (V.I. 2008) (clarifies appellate review framework and jurisdictional considerations)
- United Corp. v. Tutu Park Ltd., 55 V.I. 702 (V.I. 2011) (judicial economy in addressing jurisdictional issues on appeal)