The Court holds that the Superior Court erred when it granted partial summary judgment on the Appellant's counterclaims because the discovery rule applies to the statute of limitations for fraud and the Appellee had failed to meet her initial burden by pointing to any evidence that the Appellant knew or should have known about the alleged fraud or misrepresentation more than two years prior to the date he filed his counterclaims. The Court further holds that the Superior Court erred when it granted the Appellee's request for partition because the Superior Court failed to ascertain the parties' respective rights to the properties as mandated by 28 V.I.C. § 458. Finally, the Court finds that the Superior Court did not err when it denied Appellant's request for relief under an unjust enrichment theory because Appellant made no attempt to prove the elements of an unjust enrichment claim at trial, but used the unjust enrichment cause of action as a vehicle to re-litigate the fraud and misrepresentation counterclaims that had previously been dismissed.
Supreme Court Of The Virgin Islands