Opinions of the United 2004 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

7-8-2004

AT&T Virgin Islands v. Govt of VI Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 03-3318

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004

Recommended Citation "AT&T Virgin Islands v. Govt of VI" (2004). 2004 Decisions. Paper 511. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004/511

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2004 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________

No. 03-3318 ___________

AT&T OF VIRGIN ISLANDS; CANEEL BAY, INC.

v.

THE GOVERNMENT OF VIRGIN ISLANDS

(V.I. Civil No. 01-cv-00195)

MILLER PROPERTIES, INC.

v.

THE GOVERNM ENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS,

(V.I. Civil No. 01-cv-00193)

The Government of the Virgin Islands,

Appellant

___________

On Appeal from the District Court of the Virgin Islands (D.C. Civil Nos. 01-cv-00193 and 01-cv-00195) Judges: The Honorable Raymond L. Finch, Chief Judge The Honorable Thomas K. Moore, District Judge The Honorable Darryl Dean Donohue, Territorial Judge

___________ Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) June 22, 2004

Before: NYGAARD, McKEE, and CHERTOFF, Circuit Judges.

(Filed: July 8, 2004)

___________

JUDGMENT ORDER ___________

This is an appeal from a non-final order of the Appellate Division of the District

Court of the Virgin Islands, which does not fall within an exception to the finality

doctrine. See

; 48 U.S.C. § 1631a(c). The case was remanded for a

determination of whether the six-year statute of limitations applies to bar the

government’s attempt to collect taxes from two of the three appellees, and, thus,

proceedings are ongoing in the territorial court. This case, therefore, is hereby dismissed

for lack of appellate jurisdiction. See In re Alison,

(3d Cir. 1988).

/s/ Richard L. Nygaard Circuit Judge