Anderson v. Government of the Virgin Islands
Docket: Civ. No. 1996-118
Court: District Court, Virgin Islands; November 30, 1999; Federal District Court
Attorney Lee Rohn has appealed a Court order that imposed sanctions for her misuse of the subpoena process. The Court expresses concern regarding her representations to the Court of Appeals. In 1997, Rohn issued two subpoenas to the U.S. Customs Service for documents from the personnel file of Ramon Davila, a Customs employee and former Commissioner of Police for the Virgin Islands. Davila filed a motion to quash the subpoenas and sought sanctions against Rohn, who opposed the motion. The Court granted Davila's motion, citing Rohn's abuse of her subpoena authority under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 and her failure to comply with Customs regulations (19 C.F.R. 103.22). Sanctions of $900 were imposed to cover Davila's attorney fees incurred in contesting the subpoenas. In her appeal summary, Rohn acknowledged her procedural errors but described them as "inadvertent and certainly not intentional." The Court notes that Rohn's failure to adhere to Customs regulations was a key reason for the sanctions, prompting a clarification of its opinion. The Customs Service had formally objected to Rohn's subpoenas in a letter, stating that they did not meet the regulatory requirements, specifically lacking necessary documentation such as the summons and complaint, along with a statement summarizing the documents' relevance. The Customs Service provided clear instructions to Attorney Rohn regarding compliance with federal regulations, specifically detailing the necessary procedures and referencing relevant sections of the Code of Federal Regulations. Despite this guidance, Rohn submitted a second subpoena on March 26, 1997, which repeated the deficiencies of a prior January subpoena. The Customs Service reiterated its objections, noting that the new subpoena still lacked the required attachments of the summons and complaint, and failed to substantiate the relevance of the requested documents. The Court observed that while the initial errors might have been inadvertent, Rohn's continued non-compliance after receiving detailed corrections indicated willfulness. Consequently, the Court decided to supplement its previous opinion regarding this matter and issued an order on December 1, 1999. The Court allowed Rohn multiple opportunities to address the sanctions imposed on her, including a hearing on the appropriate amount of those sanctions, which culminated in a $900 penalty. Rohn was given additional time to respond to the sanctions to ensure she understood they were directed at her personally. For further details on the January subpoena's content, the Court referenced a prior case decision.