Judge Grants A.G.’s Request, Dismisses Laverne Mills-Williams Case Against Mapp As Futile

ST. CROIX — A Superior Court judge has dismissed multiple suits against Governor Kenneth Mapp, levied against the territory’s leader by attorney Lee Rohn on behalf of attorney Laverne Mills-Williams, claiming that she was the victim of defamation and that she was wrongfully discharged by the administration.

The motion to dismiss was requested by Attorney General Claude Walker.

“We feel vindicated that we did not do anything wrong,” Mr. Walker told this publication this morning. “In particular governor Mapp acted in accordance with the law.”

In November 2014, Mr. Mapp ordered Mr. Walker to terminate the employment of Mrs. Mills-Williams, sending notification to her himself through a notice of termination letter.

The reason for the dismissal, according to a press release Government House had issued, was because of Mrs. Mills-Williams’s alliance with Attorney Lee Rohn, a lawyer whose name is ubiquitous in the territory, and whom Mr. Mapp said was a “convicted criminal known for consorting with persons who have been convicted on more than one occasion of trafficking in, distributing and using narcotics and other illegal substances in and through the U.S. Virgin Islands.”

What Mr. Mapp deemed an unholy alliance was birthed when Mrs. Mills-Williams filed suit against the administration, after a fallout over the governor’s credit card spending habits. Mrs. Mills-Williams was hired by Mr. Mapp through the recommendation of the administration’s chief legal counsel, Emile Henderson III. According to local media reports at the time, Mr. Mapp wanted to see and possibly block certain expenses from the public’s view — in violation of the Freedom of Information Act — but Mrs. Mills-Williams refused to adhere to the governor’s demands. She was later relieved from her duties at Government House, where she served as special assistant attorney general to the Attorney General of the Virgin Islands, and jounced to and fro to various government departments by the administration.

“I am not confident that your access and potential influence to ongoing criminal investigations and evidence would not be compromised on behalf of and through your association with Attorney Lee J. Rohn,” wrote the governor in his notice of termination letter.

According to the dismissal document, Mrs. Mills-Williams accused the defendants, among them Mr. Henderson, of misrepresentation. But it said that her pleadings did not specify whether she meant fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation, although her filing indicated that she could have meant both, despite listing it as a single claim.

Specifically, Mrs. Mills-Williams, court documents reveal, pointed to Mr. Henderson’s representation that the Mapp administration “was going to be unlike other administrations and that it was going to be ethical, do all actions by the book and be a reputable administration.” She contended that those statements were part of the reason she took the job with the administration.

But the court said in order to establish that Mr. Henderson committed fraud, Mrs. Mills-Williams pleading should have shown: 1), that Mr. Henderson made misrepresentation of fact, opinion, intention or law; 2), that he knew or had reason to know his statement was false; 3), for the purpose of inducing Mrs. Mills-Williams to act on the misrepresentation; 4), that she justifiably relied on the misrepresentation; and 5), that her reliance caused her pecuniary loss — none of which was proven.

“Mills-Williams’s allegations of misrepresentation fail because Henderson’s statements were plain puffery,” wrote Judge Kathleen Mackay in her concluding opinion. “Her allegations of Whistleblower Protection Act violations fail because she never reported a violation under the Act.

“Her allegations of interference with a contract fail because agents of an employer are by definition incapable of interfering with an employer’s contract, and her allegations of defamation fail because of the governor’s executive privilege. Therefore, the court will grant defendants motion to dismiss and deny Mills-Williams’s motion to amend as futile. The matter will be dismissed without prejudice,” concluded the opinion.

Judge Mackay ordered the following:

That the plaintiff’s motion to amend second amended complain is denied; that the defendant’s motion to dismiss second amended complaint is granted; that this matter is dismissed without prejudice; and that the copies of the order and memorandum of opinion be distributed to counsel of record.