Case Caption: Simkins v. Bank of Nova Scotia et al Case Number: SCT-CIV-2016-0044Date: 01/10/2025Author: Hodge, Rhys S. Citation: 2025 VI 2Summary: In an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands dismissing the plaintiff’s negligence claim against a commercial tenant whose leased building abutted a public sidewalk where plaintiff became injured when he stepped on a manhole cover in front of the building, which caused it to flip up and resulted in plaintiff falling into the manhole, the judgment is reversed. While the commercial tenant did not possess a duty to maintain and repair the sidewalk or the manhole cover adjacent to its leased premises, the Superior Court erred in holding that the commercial tenant had no legal duty to warn or report the dangerous condition. Ownership, control, or responsibility for a dangerous condition are not prerequisites for the duty to warn or report a known danger, and the decision in Machado v. Yacht Haven U.S.V.I., LLC, 61 V.I. 373 (V.I. 2014) renders plaintiff’s status as a customer or non-customer of the commercial tenant irrelevant. The commercial tenant never represented in its statement of uncontested facts supporting its summary judgment motion upon which the Superior Court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s negligence claim was based that it had no knowledge of the defective manhole cover on the sidewalk abutting its business or that the harm stemming from its failure to warn or report was not foreseeable. On this record, plaintiff possessed no obligation to submit proof in support of those elements, and it is concluded that plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the commercial tenant owed him a duty to warn of the dangerous condition or to report the danger to the government. Accordingly, the judgment and order of the Superior Court are reversed, and plaintiff’s negligence claim against the commercial tenant is reinstated.Attachment: Open Document or Opinion