S. Ct. Civ. No. 2010-0084

An appeal seeking review of opinions and orders appointing a receiver for properties owned by and mortgaged to the parties is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The 30-day limitation on time to appeal specified in 4 V.I.C. § 33(d)(5) for "all such cases" applies not only to the appeals taken pursuant to §§ 33(d)(1)-(4), but also to those taken under §§ 33(b)(1)-(2). The legislature intended this period to set a jurisdictional requirement for the hearing of appeals, and not simply a claims processing procedure, and thus this Court lacks jurisdiction over the present appeal. The appellant's motion to "stay" or "clarify" the challenged opinions and orders could not have tolled the time to appeal under Supreme Court Rule 5(a)(4), because § 33(d)(5) requires that an appeal be taken within 30 days of the date of the decision without providing for this Court to extend or toll this period. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.