United States v. Sixty-Four Barrels Distilled Spirits

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that employer bears the burden to prove one or more of “the permissible grounds for discharge set forth in [V.I. Code Ann. tit. 24, § 76(a)-(c) as] affirmative defenses” (quoting Rennie, 62 V.I. at 543)
• finding an abuse of discretion in denying leave to amend due to incorrect legal interpretation
• “[A] plaintiff is ‘not required to anticipate in his complaint any affirmative defenses [the defendant] might raise in its answer.””
• defendant is required to “plead and prove” affirmative defenses, which “must be raised by a defendant in its answer”
• “Inasmuch as the VIWDA creates a statutory presumption that an employment discharge is wrongful, requiring a plaintiff to specifically plead and prove that he was wrongfully discharged (as opposed to simply discharged
• plaintiff not required to anticipate affirmative defenses in the complaint

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).