Epstein Secrets

2d 829, 831 (1999). Once these distinctions have been made, the trial judge has broad equitable powers in disposing of marital property. Fuentes, 38 V.I. at 35, 1997 WL 889532, at *5. [5] [HN4]Although not specifically defined, marital property ['23] has been construed to encompass any property whic

rearguing matters already addressed by the court, or for raising arguments that could have been raised before but were not." Bostic v. AT&T of the V.I., 312 F.Supp. 2d 731, 733, 45 V.I. 553 (D.V.I. 2004). In its motion for reconsideration, North Shore made two arguments. First, it argued that the

order follows. JULITO A. FRANCIS, Petitioner v. DEBRA L. WRIGHT- FRANCIS, Respondent Family No. ST-10-DI-226 Superior Court of the Virgin Islands, Division of St. Thomas and St. John 2014 V.I. LEXIS 45; 61 V.I. 13 July 14, 2014, Decided July 14, 2014, Filed For internal use only SDNY_GM_00057212 CONFIDENTIAL -

2d 829, 831 (1999). Once these distinctions have been made, the trial judge has broad equitable powers in disposing of marital property. Fuentes, 38 V.I. at 35, 1997 WL 889532, at '5. [5] IHN41Although not specifically defined, marital property [e23] has been construed to encompass any property whic

June 6, 2012, Decided June 6, 2012, Filed SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Affirmed by Prosser v. Carroll (In re Prosser), 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 15853 (3d Cir. V.I., Aug. 1, 2013) For internal use only SDNY_GM_00059974 CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R.CON(F IDENTIAL DB-SONY-0022798 EFTA_00I705 IS EFTA01297

Order follows. JULITO A. FRANCIS, Petitioner v. DEBRA L. WRIGHT- FRANCIS, Respondent Family No. ST-10-DI-226 Superior Court of the Virgin Islands, Division of St. Thomas and St. John For internal use only SDNY_GM_00059979 CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R.CON(FIDENTIAL DB-SONY-0022803 EFTA_001 70523 EFTA0129710

V.I.C. § 4903(a)(1). Berrran4 2010 WI, 2507305, at '9 (citing Metcalfe v. Renaissance Marine, Inc., 566 F.3d 324, 332 (3d Cir. 009)). Aftrnbook 47 V.I. at 283; see also Ifendrickson v. Reg 0 Co., 17 V.L 457, 462 (D.V.I. 1980). Afruccife, 566 F.3d at 332 ("Mhe Metcalfe: assert that Renaissance exchan

ion because, it asserts, the Virgin Islands is an improper venue.'9 It is Fancelli's burden to prove that the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands, Division of St. Thomas and St. John, is an improper venue.50 Under Virgin Islands law, courts (Def. is Mot. to Dismiss 13.) FED. R. CTV. P. I 9(aX I). RESTATEMENT (SECON