Skip to Content
Judiciary of the US Virgin Islands
Supreme Court
Superior Court
Supreme Court
of the
Virgin Islands
A+
A-
{1}
##LOC[OK]##
Judicial Home
Superior Court
About Us
Justices
Chief Justice Rhys S. Hodge
Associate Justice Maria M. Cabret
Associate Justice Ive Arlington Swan
Associate Justice Harold W.L. Willocks
Hours and Locations
Holidays
Contact Us
Administration
Offices of the Court
Office of Bar Admissions
Overview
Committee of Bar Examiners
Regular Admissions
Special Admissions
Pro Hac Vice Admissions
Bar Schedule of Fees
Office of the Clerk
Promulgation and Administrative Orders
Self Help Guide
Fee Schedule
Forms
Contact Us
Office of Disciplinary Counsel
Members of Discipline Boards
Attorney Discipline
Judicial Discipline
Unauthorized Practice of Law
Attorney Registration
Contact Us
Rules
Opinions
Oral Arguments Calendar
Court Calendars
Archived Court Calendars
Current Court Calendars
Judicial Home
Superior Court
About Us
Justices
Chief Justice Rhys S. Hodge
Associate Justice Maria M. Cabret
Associate Justice Ive Arlington Swan
Associate Justice Harold W.L. Willocks
Hours and Locations
Holidays
Contact Us
Administration
Offices of the Court
Office of Bar Admissions
Overview
Committee of Bar Examiners
Regular Admissions
Special Admissions
Pro Hac Vice Admissions
Bar Schedule of Fees
Office of the Clerk
Promulgation and Administrative Orders
Self Help Guide
Fee Schedule
Forms
Contact Us
Office of Disciplinary Counsel
Members of Discipline Boards
Attorney Discipline
Judicial Discipline
Unauthorized Practice of Law
Attorney Registration
Contact Us
Rules
Opinions
Oral Arguments Calendar
Court Calendars
Archived Court Calendars
Current Court Calendars
MENU
Supreme Court of the US Virgin Islands
»
Court Opinions
»
Published Opinions
»
2018 Published Opinions
»
S. Ct. BA. No. 2018-0018, 2018-0019, 2018-0020
A+
A-
S. Ct. BA. No. 2018-0018, 2018-0019, 2018-0020
Sub Menu
Skip Sidebar Navigation
S. Ct. BA. No. 2018-0018, 2018-0019, 2018-0020
S. Ct. Crim. No. 2017-0043
Last item for navigation
Case Caption:
In re Application of Jindal; In re Application of Roush; In re Application of Schmitten
Case Number:
S. Ct. BA. No. 2018-0018, 2018-0019, 2018-0020
Date:
11/29/2018
Author:
Per Curiam
Citation:
Summary:
Following this Court’s June 15, 2018 order to show cause – in light of an allegation that the applicants have engaged in unauthorized practice of law in the Virgin Islands – their applications for admission to practice pro hac vice are denied, and this matter is referred to the appropriate authorities. The claims that the acts performed by the applicants were consistent with ordinary cross-jurisdictional litigation practice, or that it is relevant that the acts were performed while they were physically present in Washington, D.C., are wholly without merit. Rule 211.8.5 of the Virgin Islands Rules of Professional Conduct governs choice of law when attorneys engage in multi-jurisdictional practice, and provides that for conduct in connection with a matter pending before a tribunal, the rules of the jurisdiction in which the tribunal sits shall apply. When they applied for pro hac vice admission, these applicants agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of this Court and to be bound by the disciplinary rules applicable to Virgin Islands attorneys. Therefore, the Virgin Islands definition of the practice of law—including Virgin Islands rules and statutes relating to the unauthorized practice of law—apply to their conduct. Under Rule 211.5.5 of the Virgin Islands Rules of Professional Conduct the practice of law encompasses all matters implicating the rights and remedies of clients. These applicants held themselves out as lawyers with respect to the underlying matter, and any work they claimed to have performed necessarily exceeded the acts—if any—that could permissibly be performed by a paralegal or secretary. Neither Supreme Court Rule 201, Virgin Islands Rule of Professional Conduct 211.5.5, 4 V.I.C. § 443, nor any other applicable Virgin Islands rule or statute codifies a federal practice exception to either the prohibition on unauthorized practice of law or the requirement that one cannot practice law in the Virgin Islands without being a member of the Virgin Islands Bar, and no such exception is recognized. Accordingly, the petitions for admission pro hac vice are denied. Since the underlying conduct may potentially warrant action beyond the denial of pro hac vice admission, this matter is referred to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, the Board on Professional Responsibility, the Board on Unauthorized Practice of Law, and the Virgin Islands Attorney General for the purpose of taking any additional action which they may find appropriate.
Attachment:
Open Document or Opinion