A sweeping overhaul of the Virgin Islands' probate laws advanced through the Committee on Rules and Judiciary on Thursday, despite objections from a Virgin Islands Bar Association committee that questioned whether replacing the existing code would resolve the longstanding delays affecting families attempting to settle estates and transfer inherited property.
Bill No. 36-0277, an 181-page measure sponsored by Senator Novelle Francis Jr., would establish a comprehensive probate code governing inheritance with and without a will, administration of deceased persons' estates, and related court procedures. The legislation comes as the territory continues to contend with a backlog of approximately 801 probate cases, according to figures reported at the close of fiscal year 2025.
Mr. Francis described the legislation as the “culmination of years of deliberate work to modernise our laws and protect the interests of heirs, property owners, and future generations.”
He acknowledged that the proposed changes would not “immediately resolve our existing backlog,” but said the legislation represents “an opportunity to take meaningful action to establish a clearer, more consistent, and more dependable legal framework.”
The bill seeks to adopt three articles of the Uniform Probate Code, including provisions governing intestate succession, wills, administration of estates, and probate proceedings involving property belonging to people who died outside the territory. Ben Orzeske, chief counsel of the Uniform Law Commission, identified the proposed changes as Articles Two, Three, and Four of the model code.
Several testifiers supported the proposed overhaul, arguing that the current system creates unnecessary expenses and delays for families attempting to settle the affairs of deceased relatives.
Troy de Chabert-Schuster, AARP's state director in the Virgin Islands, said the legislation would help families “transfer property with greater certainty and fewer barriers.”
He explained that the proposed framework addresses inheritance rights, estate administration, appointment of personal representatives, creditor claims, distribution of assets, and procedures for closing estates.
Among the proposed changes are simplified procedures for smaller estates. According to Mr. de Chabert-Schuster, the legislation would increase the threshold for using an affidavit to collect certain personal property from $25,000 to $150,000 and establish a separate summary procedure for qualifying estates valued at $150,000 or less.
Attorney Tom Bolt also supported the legislation, describing probate as a matter that “addresses a problem every family may face.” He said existing procedures can add considerable expense and delay during an already difficult period for surviving relatives.
Mr. Bolt explained that the proposed framework would allow qualifying uncontested estates to proceed through less formal procedures, while maintaining notice requirements and access to the courts when disputes arise.
For individuals who die without a will, the legislation would also adopt a method known as per capita at each generation for distributing estates among descendants. The proposal additionally addresses the rights of surviving spouses, including elective-share provisions intended to account for the circumstances of a marriage and the interests of children from previous relationships.
“The legislation will not eliminate grief or settle every family disagreement. It will give families a clearer, more efficient process,” Mr. Bolt said.
Wayne Biggs, chief executive officer of the Virgin Islands Economic Development Authority, similarly endorsed the proposed changes, describing the legislation as “a thoughtful and policy-sound modernization of Virgin Islands probate law.”
Attorney Jessica Tully, who participated in developing the legislation, also supported its advancement but identified provisions in the latest version that she said required further alignment. She urged lawmakers to move forward with “targeted refinements and a continuing implementation partnership.”
However, attorney Karabo Molyneaux-Molloy, testifying on behalf of the Virgin Islands Bar Association's Legislation and Law Reform Committee, challenged the need for a comprehensive replacement of the existing probate code.
The committee recommends “targeted amendments to the existing probate code rather than adopting Bill 36-0277 in its current form,” she told lawmakers, arguing that the current framework “requires improvement, not necessarily replacement.”
Ms. Molyneaux-Molloy maintained that the problems confronting the probate system are not necessarily the result of outdated statutes, but rather deficiencies in how probate cases are administered.
She pointed to a general legal profession with limited probate specialization, magistrates responsible for seven categories of cases, and differences in how the Superior Court's St. Thomas and St. Croix divisions handle matters involving deceased heirs.
Among the committee's recommendations was preserving existing statutory protections intended to prevent the partition and sale of generational property.
“Our goal should not simply just be a new probate code. It should be a probate system that works for the people of the Virgin Islands,” Ms. Molyneaux-Molloy said.
The objections prompted a pointed exchange with Mr. Francis, who questioned why the committee's proposed changes had not been presented during the years of consultation that preceded the hearing.
The senator noted that the Virgin Islands had previously attempted comprehensive probate reform around 2010, only for lawmakers to repeal several provisions of the newly enacted framework. Senator Angel Bolques Jr. suggested that those reversals “put us at a disadvantage.”
Mr. Francis maintained that the territory could not continue operating under outdated laws without undertaking substantial changes. He told Ms. Molyneaux-Molloy that her proposed amendments “should have been timely so that we could have had that in place, so that we could have a better discussion on it today.”
Ms. Molyneaux-Molloy rejected the suggestion that the length of the consultation process should prevent further recommendations.
“Just because you have three years to work on it, it does not mean that there's not an opportunity for ongoing improvement,” she responded.
She said her understanding of the hearing was “not to rubber stamp the bill, but to give suggestions as to how to make it improved.”
Mr. Francis subsequently requested that Ms. Molyneaux-Molloy submit the committee's recommendations, noting that lawmakers would have additional opportunities to amend the legislation before a full Senate vote and, if necessary, after enactment.
Despite the disagreement, the measure advanced with overwhelming committee support.
The proposed legislation would not take effect immediately if enacted. Under the timeline presented during Thursday's hearing, implementation would begin January 1, 2028, or six months after enactment, whichever is later.
Senator Clifford Joseph urged lawmakers to proceed rather than delay the legislation over disagreements about provisions that could be amended later.
“I mean, just about every legislation that we pass here in this body, somebody comes and amends it. So, what's the difference here?” he asked.
“If you push forward, people gonna run to catch up,” Mr. Joseph stated.
