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
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
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
»
2020 Published Opinions
»
Pollins v. Feuerstein et al
A+
A-
Pollins v. Feuerstein et al
Sub Menu
Skip Sidebar Navigation
Pollins v. Feuerstein et al
S. Ct. Crim. No. 2017-0043
Last item for navigation
Case Caption:
Pollins v. Feuerstein et al
Case Number:
SCT-CIV-2020-0099
Date:
01/24/2025
Author:
Cabret, Maria M.
Citation:
2025 VI 3
Summary:
Regarding an appeal from the Superior Court’s orders denying plaintiff’s motion for a third extension of time to complete service and granting the individual defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, an evidentiary hearing is deemed to be necessary to determine whether the plaintiff’s motion should be granted by operation of Rule 4(n), either because, under all the circumstances, plaintiff has established the good cause required for a mandatory extension of the period within which to accomplish service of process or because the circumstances warrant a discretionary extension of such period, notwithstanding that they do not rise to the level of good cause required for a mandatory extension, as well as resolution of the matter of personal jurisdiction over the defendant. The matter is remanded to the Superior Court for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the defendant has engaged in evasion of process, whether the defendant has waived his objection to proper service or has otherwise consented to jurisdiction, and whether the Superior Court may exercise jurisdiction over the defendant under the Virgin Islands’ long-arm statute, 5 V.I.C. § 4903. Both orders are reversed and the matter is remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the issues of service of process and personal jurisdiction.
Attachment:
Open Document or Opinion