Court Opinion

ID: 9927561
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-29 14:40:11.349313+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:24:18.628482
License: Public Domain

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
                                  DIVISION OF ST CROIX
IN RE                                           Civil No SX 2023 CV 413 Civil No SK 2023 CV 422
SUGAR ISLAND MASTER                             Cle No SX 2023 CV 414 Cm] No SX 2023 CV 423
ASSOCIATION INC D/B/A                           Civil No SX 2023 CV 416 Civil No SX 2023 CV 427
CARAMBOLA PROPERTY OWNERS                       Civil No sx 2023 CV 417 Civil No sx 2023 CV 428
ASSOCIATION S ACTIONS FOR DEBT
LESS THAN 375 000                               Civil No SX 2023 CV 418 Civil No SX 2023 CV 429
                                                Civil No SX 2023 CV 420 Civil No SX 2023 CV 430
                                                CITE AS 2024 VI SUPER            3

 Appearances
 C Jacob Gower, Esq
 GOWER LEGAL LLC
 St Croix, U S Virgin Islands
 J Russell B Pate,Esq
 THE PATE LAW FIRM
 St Croix, U S Virgin Islands
 For Plamlgf

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

         WILLOCKS, Administrative Judge

 '1] l   [HIS MATTER came before the Court on Plaintiff Sugar Island Master Association, Inc

 d/b/a Carambola Property Owners Association’s (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) motions to reassign

 mattels to the Magistrate Division in the above mentioned cases, ﬁled on January 3, 2024

                                       BACKGROUND

 ﬁ| 2    On December 5, 2023, Plaintitf ﬁled a complaint against Defendant Curtis Eugene

 Defendant Stephanie Deville Eugene (collectively, hereinafter Defendants”), and in rem Lot 48

 48 River (hereinafter ‘Subject Property’) in an action for debt less than $75 000, Sugar [Aland

 Mavter Assoczatzon Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners A$$0610t10n v Eugene er a1 Civil

 Case No SX 2023 CV 413 This matter was randomly assigned to the undersigned judge
In Re Sugar Island Master Assocmtron Inc d/b a Carambola
Property Owners Assocmtlon 3 Actions for Debt Less Than $75 000
Civil No SX 2023 CV 413‘ Civil No SX 2023 CV 422
Civil No SX 2023 CV 414‘ Civil No SX 2023 CV 423
Civil No SX 2023 CV 416 Civil No 5X 2023 CV 427
Civil No SX 2023 CV 417 Civil No SX 2023 CV 428
Civil No SX 2023 (.V 418 Civil No SX 2023 CV 429
Civil No SX 2023 CV 420 Civil No SX 2023 CV 430
Memorandum Opinion and Order                                                               2024 VI SUPER       2‘
Page 2 of 10

Subsequently, Plaintiff ﬁled eleven more actions for debt less than $75,000 1 These eleven cases

were randomly assigned to the undersigned judge, Judge Brady and Magistrate Judge Brow Ross 3

1| 3      On January 3, 2023, Plaintiff ﬁled an identical motion to reassign matters to the Magistrate

Division in each of the twelve cases In its motions, Plaintiff indicated that (i) “[Plaintiff] has ﬁled

twelve actions for debt collection against Defendants who own property and are delinquent in their

dues payments,” which includes this instant matter 3 (Motion 1), (ii) “Each of the twelve actions

 Saga; Island Master ASJOCIatIOH Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners Assocmnon v Meryl et a1 Civil Case No
SX 2023 CV 414
Sugar Island Master Assocmllon Inc (M) a Carambola Property Owners Assocmuon v Gilles er a! Civil Case No
8X 2023 CV 416
Sugar Island Master Assoczauon Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners Assocmtlon v North Shore Partners et a1
Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 417
Sugar Island Master Association Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners Assocmtlon v Crow Re holdings LLC et
a! Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 418
Sugar Island Master Assocmtlon Inc (M) a Carambola Property Owners Assocmllon v Banter Fmanna! et 0/ Civil
Case No SX 2023 CV 420
Sugar Island Master Assoomtlon Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners Assoczattor: v Frey er a] Civil Case No
8X 2023 CV 422
Sugar Island Master Assocmnon Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners Assocmuon v Allen et a! Civil Case No
SX 202.) CV 423‘
Sugar Island Master Assocmtlon Inc (IV!) a Carambola Property Owners Assocmtlon v Desborne e! at Civil Case
No SX 2023 CV 427
Sugar Island Master Association Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners Assocmllon v WIIItams e! a! Civil Case
No SX 2023 CV 428.
Sugar Island Master Assocmuon Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners Assocmtlon v Thomas et a! Civil Case No
SX 2023 CV 429 and
Sugar Island Master Assocmtlon Inc d/b a Carambola Property Owners Assocmllon v Lewzs et a] Civil Case No
8X 2023 CV 430
- 9ee Infra, footnote 3
‘ Plaintiff included the following chart in its motion to identify all twelve cases
                   Judge             Yea;      gas:     Name               Last       Belance       3:52pm
         I         Willocks          2023      413      Curtis           Eugene       $49 165 56    48 River
         2         Ross              2023      414      Lincoln          Meryl        $44 674 09    473 River
         3         Willocks          2023      416      Frederick        Gilles       $36 145 05    I9 River
         4         Ross              2023      417      North Shore Partners          $33 8] I 43   2| River
         5         Brady             2023      418      Croix Re Holdings LLC         $32 107 90    7 Prosperity
         6         Willocks          2023      420      Bunter Financial              $29 889 43    6 Prosperity
         7         Ross              2023      422      Nehemiah           Frey       $27 037 69    40 River
In Re Sugar Island Master Assocmtlon Inc d/b a Carambola
Property Owners Assoczanon '5 Acttonsfor Debt Less Than $ 75 000
Civil No SX 2023 CV 413 Civil No SX 2023 CV 422
Civil No SX 2023 CV 414 Civil No SX 2023 CV 423
Civil No SX 2023 CV 4|6' Civil No SX 2023 CV 427
Civil No SX 2023 CV 417' Civil No SX 2023 CV 428
CiVil N0 8X 2023 CV 418 Civil N0 SX 2023 CV 429
Civil No SX 2023 CV 420 Civil No SX 202.) CV 430
Memorandum Opinion and Order                                                         2024 VI SUPER         3
Page 3 of 10

including this one        were randomly assigned amongst the Superior Court judges                     (Id ); (iii)

 ‘[Plaintiff_| has separately given notice to the Clerk of Court that the twelve cases are related ”

(Id ) and (iv)     [t]he ﬁrst ﬁled case (Eugene 8X 2023 CV 00413) was randomly assigned to

Judge Willocks, and consistent with the Standing Order, [Plaintiff] has asked that Clerk to reassign

the ﬁve matters assigned to Judge Ross Edwards and the three matters assigned to Judge Brady be

reassigned to Judge Willocks ” (Id , at 1 2 ) However, in its motion, Plaintiffultimately moved the

Court to reassign Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 413                   and the other eleven related cases         to the

Magistrate Division in the interest of “its just, speedy and inexpensive determination”4 because

this matter, like the eleven related ones, (i) ‘ seeks less than $75,000 in damages,” (ii) “[Plaintiff]

does not request a jury trial,” (iii) “the face of the complaint conspicuously notes that it regards a

debt less than $75,000 00,” (iv) “it is within the original jurisdiction of the Magistrate Division,”5

and (v) “[a]ssignment of this matter to the Magistrate Division will encourage efﬁcient pretrial

management [because] [i]f all twelve related matters in the same hands the opening of master case

would be in order, and the Magistrate Division could coordinate hearings and discovery amongst

        8        Brady             2023     423      Rogello           Allen   $25 297 6|       34 River
        9        Ross              2023     427      Simpson           Desbome $49 2| 1 79      27 & 55 River
         [0      Brady             2023     428      Cosmo             Williams $14 35] 3|      7| River
         II      Willocks          2023     429      Earl              Thomas $9 846 17         69 River
         l2      Ross              2023     430      Logan             Lewis    $24 547 06      28 River
        (Motion 1 )
“ Plaintiffreferenced V l R CIV P I
5 Plaintiff referenced Title 4 V I C § 123(a)(7)( Each magistrate judge may   hear all civil cases where the amount
in controversy does not exceed $75,000 ”)
In Re Sugar Island Master Assocmuon Inc (1/!) a Carambola
Property Owners Assoczanon s Acnonsfor Debt Less Than $75 000
Civil No SX 2023 CV 413 Civil No SX 2023 CV 422
Civil No SX 2023 CV 414 CiVil No SX 2023 CV 423
Civil No SX 2023 CV 416 Civil No 8X 2023 CV 427
Civil No SX 2023 CV 417' Civil No SX 2023 CV 428
Civil No SX 2023 CV 418' Civil No SX 2023 CV 429
Civil No SX 2023 CV 420 Civil No SX 2023 CV 430
Memorandum Opinion and Order                                                              2024 V1 SUPER         &
Page 4 of 10

all the cases ”6 (Id , at 2) (emphasis omitted) Plaintiff also indicated in its motion that “it is ﬁling

similar requests in each of the eleven related matters ” (Id )

‘4       As of the date of this Memorandum Opinion and Order, no response to Plaintiff’s motion

has been ﬁled by any defendants This may be because the defendants have not been served with

a copy of the motion since the motion did not include a certiﬁcate of service” section

                                                   DISCUSSION

         1    Related Cases

11 5     In Vanterpool v Gov’t of the VI , the Virgin Islands Supreme Court has pointed out that

“[u]nder Virgin Islands statutory law, it is the responsibility of the Presiding Judge of the Superior

Court to ‘divide the business and assign the cases among all the judges of the court in such manner

as will secure the prompt dispatch of the business of the court [and that] [n]o provision of the

Virgin Islands Code permits the Presiding Judge to delegate this statutory assignment power to a

different judge       63 V I 563 574 (V I 2015) (quoting Title 4 V I C § 72b(a)) but also

emphasized that “[i]n reaching this decision, we emphasize that the Presiding Judge may delegate

the enforcement of a case assignment policy to other individuals, such as by directing the Clerk's

Ofﬁce to assign new cases at random, or pursuant to a predetermined rotation system[,]” 63 V I

at 574 n 4 The undersigned judge               while acting in his former administrative capacity as the

Presiding Judge       had delegated the enforcement of related cases assignment policy to the Clerk’s

6 Plaintiffreferenced Edwardsv Hess 011 Virgin Islands Corp 66 VI 218 226 (VI Super Ct 2017)( Openinga
master case to coordinate some aspect of pre trial procedure in multiple cases is inherent within authority of courts to
manage their cases and at least implied within the authority granted by Virgin Islands Rule of Civil Procedure 16(c) ”)
In Re Sugar Island Master Assoczatlon Inc d/b a Carambola
Property Owners Assocmtlon 5 Actionsfor Debt Less Than $75 000
Civil No SX 2023 CV 413 Civil No SX 2023 CV 422
Civil No SX 2023 CV 414' Civi1 No SX 2023 CV 423
Civil No SX 2023 CV 416‘Civi1No SX 2023 CV 427
Civil No SX 2023 CV 417' Civil No SX 2023 CV 428
Civil No SX 2023 CV 418 Civil No SX 2023 CV 429
Civil No SX 2023 CV 420 Civil N0 SX 2023 CV 430
Memorandum Opinion and Order                                                            2024 VI SUPER        3
Page 5 of 10

Ofﬁce by issuing a standing order on December 3, 2020 (hereinafter Standing Order”) regarding

related cases, which was subsequently adopted as Superior Court Rule 17 1                    Superior Court Rule

17 1 provides in relevant part

         Once a notiﬁcation of related case is ﬁled, the Clerk 5 Ofﬁce shall assign (or reassign) the
         newer case to the same judicial ofﬁcer assigned to the older case In the event of an
         objection, the judicial ofﬁcer assigned to the older case shall decide whether the cases are
         in fact, related If the judicial ofﬁcer determines the cases are not related, he shall return
         the newer case(s) to the Clerk's Ofﬁce for reassignment to another judicial ofﬁcer If the
        judicial ofﬁcer determines that the cases are related, the Clerk's Ofﬁce shall skip that
        judicial ofﬁcer when assigning new cases at random in proportion to the number of cases
         deemed related

         Super Ct R 17 1

1] 6     The plain language of Superior Court Rule 17 1 is unambiguous that as soon as Plaintiff

ﬁled the notiﬁcation that the subsequently ﬁled eleven cases were related to Civil Case No SX

2023 CV 413, the Clerk s Ofﬁce should have reassigned the newer cases to the undersigned judge,

the judicial ofﬁcer assigned to the older case, without any action necessary by the Presiding Judge

See Super Ct R 17 1 ‘ The canons of construction in statutory interpretation apply equally to the

interpretation of court procedural rules,’ Whyte v Bockmo, 69 V I 749, 754 55 (V I 2018), and

“[t]he ﬁrst step when interpreting a statute is to determine whether the language at issue has

a plain and unambiguous meaning             Mtller v People ofthe I I 67 V I 827 844 (V I 2017) It is

well settled that when the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous no further interpretation

7 The Standing Order remained in effect until it was abrogated by the promulgation of Superior Court Rule 17 1, which
took effect on June 1 2022 See In re Amendments No 2022 001 2022 V 1 Supreme LEXIS 8 at ‘11 (Mar 16
2022)
In Re Sugar Island Master Assocmtzon Inc d/b a Carambo/a
Property Owners Assocmnon s Acnonsfor Debt Lexis Than 375 000
Civil No SX 2023 CV 413 Civil No SX 2023 CV 422
Civil N0 SX 2023 CV 414 Civil No SX 2023 CV 42.:
Civil No SX 2023 CV 416 Civil No SX 2023 CV 427
Civil No SX 2023 CV 417 Civil No SX 2023 CV 428
Civil No SX 2023 CV 418 Civil No SX 2023 CV 429
Civil No SX 2023 CV 420 Civil N0 SX 2023 CV 430
Memorandum Opinion and Order                                                    2024 VI SUPER 1
Page 6 of 10

is required See Thomas v People ofthe VI 69 V I 913 925 (V I 2018) (noting that “because

‘the statutory language [of     14   VIC       §   2101(a)]     is plain and unambiguous,      no further

interpretation is required”’); see also Codrmgton v People of the V I , 57 V I 176, 185 (2012)

(“Accordingly, when the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, a court does not

look beyond the language of the statute in interpreting the statute's meaning ’) The use of the

word “shall” in the ﬁrst sentence of the third paragraph of Superior Court Rule 17 l        to wit, “Once

a notiﬁcation of related case is ﬁled, the Clerk 3 Ofﬁce shall assign (or reassign) the newer case to

the same judicial ofﬁcer assigned to the older case ”      imposes a clear requirement for the Clerk’s

Ofﬁce to reassign the newer case to the same judicial ofﬁcer assigned to the older case once a

notiﬁcation of related case is ﬁled without any action necessary by the Presiding Judge There is

nothing in the Standing Order or Superior Court Rule 17 1 to suggest that the reassignment of

related cases required any action necessary by the Presiding Judge As such, the Court will give

effect to the plain and unambiguous language of Superior Court Rule 17 1 and hold that Superior

Court Rule 17 1 requires the Clerk’s Ofﬁce to reassign the newer case to the same judicial ofﬁcer

assigned to the older case once a notiﬁcation of related case is ﬁled without any action necessary

by the Presiding Judge See In re L 0F 62 VI 655 661 (VI 2015) ( The ﬁrst step when

interpreting a statute is to determine whether the language at issue has a plain and unambiguous

meaning ”) (internal quotation marks omitted) A review of the twelve cases’ dockets revealed that

Plaintiff did indeed notify the Clerk’s Ofﬁce that these twelve cases are related 8 This means that,

3 A notice of related cases was ﬁled Civil Case No SK 2023 CV 417 Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 418, Civil Case
No SX 2023 CV 422 Civil Case No SK 2023 CV 423 Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 427 Civil Case No SX 2023
In Re Sugar Island Master Assocmuon Inc d/b a Carambola
Property Owners Assoczauon 5 Actionsfor Debt Less Than $75 000
Civil No SX 2023 CV 413‘ CiVil No SX 2023 CV 422
Civil No SX 2023 CV 414 Civil No SK 2023 CV 423
Civil No SX 2023 CV 416 Civil No SX 2023 CV 427
Civil No SX 2023 CV 417 Civil No SX 2023 CV 428
Civil No 8X 2023 CV 418 Civil No SX 2023 CV 429
Civil No SX 2023 CV 420 Civil No SX 2023 CV 430                                                    ‘1’
Memorandum Opinion and Order                                                     2024 VI SUPER
Page 7 of 10

pursuant to Superior Court Rule 17 1, Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 413                 the ﬁrst case ﬁled out

of the twelve related cases     and the subsequent eleven related cases should already be reassigned

to the undersigned judge (if the related case was not already assigned to the undersigned judge),

which further means that Plaintiff’s motions to reassign matters to the Magistrate Division in each

of the twelve related cases are all before the undersignedjudge However, a review of these twelve

related cases revealed that, as of the date of this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Clerk’s

Ofﬁce has not yet complied with Superior Court Rule 17 1 since the Clerk’s Ofﬁce has not yet

completed the reassignment of the newer cases to the undersigned judge As such, the Court will

order the Clerk’s Ofﬁce to comply with Superior Court Rule 17 1 by reassigning the eleven related

cases ﬁled subsequent to Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 413 to the undersigned judge, the judicial

ofﬁcer assigned to Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 413             the ﬁrst case ﬁled out of the twelve related

cases To be clear, the undersigned judge        who is no longer acting in the administrative capacity

as the Presiding Judge     is not usurping the current Presiding Judge’s exclusive statutory authority

to ‘ divide the business and assign the cases,” see Vanterpool, 63 V I at 574, but simply ordering

the Clerk’s Ofﬁce to perform its duty to enforce the related cases assignment policy under Superior

Court Rule 17 1 See In re Procedure for the Reasszgnment ofCases Followmg Judicial Recusal

0r Dzsqualzﬁcatzon 2020 VI LEXIS 73 at *2 4 (VI Super Ct Nov 13 2020) (The Presiding

Judge issued a standing order regarding the case reassignment policy where, after a judicial ofﬁcer

enters an order of disqualiﬁcation or recusal, the Clerk's Ofﬁce reassigns the case to the nextjudge

CV 428 and Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 430 The notice clearly identiﬁed the twelve cases that Plaintiff deemed
related
In Re Sugar Island Master Association Inc d/b a Carambola
Property Owners Assocmnon 3 Actionsfor Debt Less Than $75 000
Civil No SX 2023 CV 4l3 Civil No SX 2023 CV 422
Civil No 8X 2023 CV 4I4 Civil No SX 2023 CV 423
Civil No SX 2023 CV 416‘ Civil No SX 2023 CV 427
Civil No SX 2023 CV 417' Civil No SX 2023 CV 428
Civil No SX 2023 CV 418' Civil No SX 2023 CV 429
Civil No 8X 2023 CV 420' Civil No SX 2023 CV 430
Memorandum Opinion and Order                                                             2024 VI SUPER         3
Page 8 of 10

in rotation without any action necessary by the Presiding Judge ) 9 The Court will also order

Plaintiff to ﬁle proofs of service showing that each of the defendants in the twelve related cases

were served with a copy of the notice of related cases in compliance with Superior Court Rule

17 llo so that the defendants can ﬁle objections, if any

° The standing order provides in relevant part
         NOW, THEREFORE pursuant to the authority conﬁned by Title 4 Section 72b(a) of the Virgin Islands
         Code IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following duties of,udicial ofﬁcers are PRESCRIBED and the
         following case reassignment policy is ADOPTED to balance the case loads of the judicial ofﬁcers following
         disqualification or recusal
         Aﬁer ajudicial ofﬁcer enters an order of disqualiﬁcation or recusal, the Clerk’s Ofﬁce shall reassign the case
         to the next judge in rotation as if it were a new case Thereafter the Clerk's Ofﬁce shall skip the receiving
        judicial ofﬁcer when assigning a new case of the same type i e , CV, DV, RV, CR, PB etc Only new cases
        may be assigned to the recusing judicial ofﬁcer and recusing judicial officers shall receive one case for each
        case they recuse or are disqualiﬁed from For cases that must be heard expeditiously, the Clerk's Ofﬁce may
        defer assigning a new case to the recusing judicial ofﬁcer until the next calendar to avoid case congestion or
         delay
        Each judicial ofﬁcer shall issue a standing order of recusal which shall be kept on ﬁle in the Clerk 5 Ofﬁce
        as to attorneys and parties for whom that judicial ofﬁcer is disqualiﬁed from presiding over or elects to
        voluntarily recuse New judicial ofﬁcers shall provide their Standing Order of Recusal to the Clerk 5 Ofﬁce
        no later than thirty (30) days after taking the oath of [‘4] ofﬁce Should a case be assigned at random to a
        judicial oﬁ'icer who is recused or disqualiﬁed based on her or his standing order the Clerks Ofﬁce shall
         immediately reassign the case to another judicial ofﬁcer in rotation without further order of the court
         Reassignment as a result of a standing order of recusal shall not trigger the case reassignment procedure
        adopted above except as to newly appointed or conﬁrmed judicial ofﬁcers Judicial ofﬁcers shall review their
        standing orders of recusal annually and no later than December 15th of each year either affirm that there are
        no changes to the list or issue a revised standing order
        In re Procedure for the Reasszgnment of Cases Followmg JudICIal Recusal 0r Disqualiﬁcation 2020 V l
        LEXIS 73 at *2 4
‘0 Superior Court Rule 17 1 provides in relevant part
        Civil cases are deemed related when two or more lawsuits (1) concern the same property (real or personal),
        or (2) involve the same or similar claim(s) between one or more of the same parties (or their successors in
        interest) that arises out of the same event, transaction or contract Civil cases are also deemed related if a
        successive lawsuit is ﬁled following the dismissal of an earlier lawsuit between one or more of the same
        parties When a civil case is ﬁled, the plaintiff petitioner, or his attemey, shall ﬁle a notice,
        contemporaneously with the complaint or petition identifying by caption and number, each related case if
        any pending in the Superior Court If no related cases are pending a notice should not be ﬁled The notice
        must be served on every defendant/respondent when serving summons and a copy of the complaint Each
        defendant/respondent, or his attorney shall serve and ﬁle a notice, contemporaneously with his ﬁrst
        responsive pleading, objecting to or concurring with the related case designation Failure to serve and ﬁle a
        notice will be construed as consent to the related case designation
 In Re Sugar Island Master Assocmtton Inc d/b/a Carambola
 Property Owners Assoczanon 5 Actionsfor Debt Less Than $75 000
 Civil No SX 2023 CV 4l3 Civil No SX 2023 CV 422
 Civil No SX 2023 CV 414' Civil No SX 2023 CV 423
 Civil No SX 2023 CV 416‘ Civil N0 5X 2023 CV 427
 Civil No SX 2023 CV 417 Civil No SX 2023 CV 428
 Civil No SX 2023 CV 418 Civil No SX 2023 CV-429
 Civil No SK 2023 CV 420' Civil No SK 2023 CV 430
 Memorandum Opinion and Order                                                              2024 VI SUPER        3!
 Page 9 of 10

          2    Plaintiff’s Motions to Reassign All Twelve Related Matters to the Magistrate
               Division

 1] 7     At this time, given the strain on Magistrate Division 3 already limited judicial resources,

 ever increasing caseload, and the existing backlogs, the Court believes that by keeping these twelve

 related cases in the Civil Division            rather than reassigning to the Magistrate Division                   will
“secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding” as

mandated by Rule 1 of the Virgin Islands Rules of Civil Procedure '1 V I R CIV P 1 As such,

the Court will deny Plaintiff’s motions to reassign this matter to the Magistrate Division in the

above mentioned cases P Given that there is no indication that the defendants were served with a

copy of Plaintiff's motion to reassign matter to the Magistrate Division, the Court will also order

Plaintiff to ﬁle proofs of service showing that each of the defendants in the twelve related cases

were served with a copy of its motion and a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order ‘3

         Attorneys and self represented parties shall immediately notify the Clerk's Ofﬁce, in writing, anytime they
         become aware of the existence of a related case Objections should be served and ﬁled within fourteen (14)
         days thereafter
         Super Ct R 17 l
'1 The Civil Division, like the Magistrate Division, can similarly encourage efﬁcient pretrial management for all
twelve related cases by coordinated hearings, scheduling orders, etc , especially since they will all be assigned to the
undersigned judge
‘7 The Court ﬁnds that it is appropriate to rule on Plaintiff‘s motions without a response from the defendant See V I
R ClV P 6 l(f)(6) ( Nothing herein shall prohibit the court from ruling without a response or reply when deemed
appropriate )
‘3 None of the defendants have appeared in the twelve related cases, which may be because that they have not been
served with the summons and complaint At this time the Court does not have the defendants information to serve
this Memorandum Opinion and Order and thus will order Plaintiff to do so instead
In Re Sugar Island Master Assocmtzon Inc d/b/a Carambola
Properly Owners Assoczanon s Actionsfor Deb! Less Than $75 000
Civil No SX 2023 CV 413 CW" No SX 2023 CV 422
Civil No SX 2023 CV 414' Civil No SX 2023 CV 423
Civil No SX 2023 CV 416‘ Civil No SX 2023 CV 427
CiViI No SX 2023 CV 417 Civil N0 SX 2023 CV 428
Civil No SX 2023 CV 4l8 Civil No SX 2023 CV 429
Civil No SX 2023 CV 420 Civil No SX 2023 CV 430
Memorandum Opinion and Order                                               2024 V1 SUPER     : k
Page 10 of IO

                                           CONCLUSION

1] 8     Based on the foregoing it is hereby

         ORDERED that the Clerk 3 Ofﬁce shall COMPLY with Superior Court Rule 17 1 by

REASSIGNING the eleven related cases ﬁled subsequent to Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 413 to

the undersigned judge, the judicial ofﬁcer assigned to Civil Case No SX 2023 CV 413         the ﬁrst

case ﬁled out of the twelve related cases It is further

        ORDERED that Plaintiff‘s motions to reassign matters to the Magistrate Division in the

above mentioned cases ﬁled on January 3, 2024, are DENIED And it is further

        ORDERED that, within sixty (60) days from the date of entry of this Memorandum

Opinion and Order Plaintiff shall FILE PROOFS OF SERVICE showing that each of the

defendants in the twelve related cases were served with (i) a copy of the notice of related cases in

compliance with Superior Court Rule 17 1, (ii) a copy of Plaintiff’s motion to reassign matter to

the Magistrate Division, and (iii) a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order
                                               6%
        DONE and so ORDERED thus '2                 day of January 2024

ATTEST                                     M&A
Tamara Charles                                         HAROLD W L WILLOCKS
Clerk of the Court                              Administrative Judge of the Superior Court

By. %___ 7W
        ‘Court Clerk Supemsor

Dated       §(c405é0d’ #4—
        IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
                    District of St. Croix

Sugar Island Master Assoc., Inc, d/b/a   Case Number: SX-2023-CV-00413;
Carambola Property Owners Assoc.,        414;416;417;418;420;422;423;427;428;
                  Plaintiff              429;430
v.                                       Action: Debt

Curtis Eugene et al,
                       Defendant.

                         NOTICE of ENTRY
                                of
                    Memorandum Opinion and Order
To J. Russell B. Pate, Charle
   C. Jacobs Gower, Esq.

                   Please take notice that on January 26, 2024
         a(n)              Memorandum Opinion and Order
                  dated     January 26, 2024      was/were entered
                      by the Clerk in the above-titled matter.

Dated    January 26, 2024                                 Tamara Charles
                                                         Clerk of the Court
                                              By:

                                                         Janeen Maranda
                                                          Court Clerk II