In re Rogers
56 V.I. 618
Supreme Court of The Virgin Is...2012Background
- Rogers filed on February 21, 2012 a petition for writ of review referencing the Ethics and Grievance Committee, but the document lacked a copy of any committee decision.
- The Court ordered the Ethics and Grievance Committee to provide sufficient materials to understand the underlying matter (February 24, 2012).
- The Committee’s March 9, 2012 filing summarized a grievance filed November 3, 2006, with a panel finding probable cause to violate Rules 1.5 and 8.4, and possibly Rule 8.1(b) for failure to cooperate; a January 28, 2011 hearing was scheduled but continued when the grievant could not be located.
- The panel ultimately issued a November 14, 2011 final decision finding violations of Rules 1.5, 8.1(b), and 8.4, imposing a private reprimand and restitution of $1,500.
- Rogers did not appeal within the forty-five day period (until December 29, 2011) and the March 12, 2012 order treated the February 21, 2012 filing as a motion to dismiss for untimeliness.
- The Court dismissed the appeal as untimely, and noted Rogers had been administratively suspended for CIeD issues but remained obligated to file documents electronically; Rule 207 governs the process and a memorandum of decision was required for de novo review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal was timely under Rule 207.4.11(b). | Rogers contends Rule 16(b) and 207.4.11(b) extensions apply. | Committee argues Rule 207.4.11(b) governs and the appeal is untimely. | Untimely; no automatic extension. |
| Whether equitable waiver can excuse the late filing. | Rogers seeks equitable waiver due to ministerial failures. | Waiver allowed only for extraordinary circumstances; none shown here. | Equitable waiver not justified; dismissal upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- First Am. Dev. Group/Carib LLC v. WestLB AG, 55 V.I. 594 (V.I. 2011) (mandatory rules may be waived only for valid, extraordinary reasons; not here)
- Worldwide Flight Servs. v. Gov’t, 51 V.I. 105 (V.I. 2009) (timeliness in petitions for writ of review hinges on issuance/countersignature dates)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Att’y Doe No. 639, 748 N.W.2d 208 (Iowa 2008) (untimely appeal denied when caused by the party, not tribunal deficiencies)
- Hard Rock Café v. Lee, 54 V.I. 622 (V.I. 2011) (supervisory authority over committee practices; need for proper procedural memorialization)
- In re McGinniss, 186 A.D. 938, 173 N.Y.S. 209 (N.Y. App. Div. 1918) (discretionary waiver of procedural rules to avoid injustice)