ST. THOMAS – The attorney representing Island Laundries Ltd. in its protracted legal battle with the government of the Virgin Islands has filed a motion to withdraw from the case, citing a complete breakdown in his relationship with his client and the company’s repeated failure to meet with him to prepare a defense.
The motion, filed last Thursday by attorney Joseph Arellano, is the latest delay in a case that has grown increasingly complicated, marked by three judicial recusals, changes of counsel, and a string of missed deadlines that have left the government’s motion to amend its complaint unanswered for more than four months.
The case stems from an eviction action the government filed against Island Laundries in August 2025, seeking to reclaim government-owned parcels in the Subbase area needed for a major redevelopment project. Island Laundries challenged the eviction by claiming an equitable interest in the property based on improvements it says it made decades ago.
READ MORE: Island Laundries puts wrinkle in VIPA expansion plans; eviction case reveals faulty gov’t oversight
In his motion to withdraw, Arellano described the situation in stark terms, writing that there had been a total breakdown in the attorney-client relationship, adding that there was a “growing and metastasizing distrust between them” and neither party accepted the word of the other.
Arellano also wrote that Island Laundries had failed to comply with multiple provisions of its retainer agreement and that the company’s management had failed and refused to meet or confer with him to discuss a strategy for the case. He said the parties had not met or conferred since the government filed its motion to amend the complaint in mid-December of last year, after the case was transferred to the Superior Court’s Civil Division from the Magistrate Division.
READ MORE: Judge transfers Island Laundries case to Civil Division, complicating VIPA’s redevelopment timeline
Leah Webster, president of Island Laundries, confirmed the split in a text message to WTJX, saying that Arellano was no longer representing the company in the matter.
“The change reflects differing opinions in approach and a total breakdown of Island Laundries Ltd.’s trust and communication regarding the case,” Webster wrote, adding that the company was confident in its legal position and in the process of securing new counsel but declining to comment further.
Arellano’s motion to withdraw is the culmination of months of mounting delays in the case. Since the case was transferred to the Civil Division last November, three judges have recused themselves.
Judge Denise Francois was the first to step aside, in December 2025, on the grounds that Island Laundries had been one of her former clients. In January, Judge Carol Thomas-Jacobs recused herself, citing a personal friendship between her spouse and Lorna Webster, a director and officer of Island Laundries and the mother of company president Leah Webster. Ten days later, Judge Sigrid Tejo also recused herself, citing her involvement in a separate complaint against Island Laundries.
To date, Island Laundries has still not responded to the government’s motion to amend the complaint, which expanded its claims to include trespass, public nuisance, and slander of title, arguing that Island Laundries’ continued occupation and assertions of co-ownership threatened to undermine developer interest in the redevelopment. It also named Leah Webster and Lorna Webster as defendants.
READ MORE: GVI says Island Laundries’ false claims may impact developer interest in Subbase plans in new filing
On January 8, Island Laundries filed its first motion for an extension of time to respond to the government’s motion to amend, with Arellano citing a busy caseload and difficulty communicating with his clients over the holidays.
But no response came.
On February 13, Arellano filed a second extension request, this time for four weeks. In that motion, he disclosed that he had been unable to schedule a conference call with the officers of Island Laundries despite multiple attempts and that certain differences had emerged between him and Leah Webster concerning tactics and “other significant matters.” He also noted that food poisoning had prevented him from attending a call that had finally been scheduled.
Newly confirmed Judge Pedro Williams granted the extension, giving Island Laundries until March 17 to respond. On that date, instead of filing a response, Arellano filed a third extension request, again citing his inability to meet with his clients in the time allotted.
On April 21, Williams granted the motion but warned it would be the final extension, ordering Island Laundries to file a response no later than May 4. On April 23, Arellano filed his motion to withdraw, which has yet to be ruled on.
It remains unclear how this development will affect the upcoming deadline for Island Laundries to file a response, leaving the case stalled and no closer to resolution than when it was transferred to the Civil Division last November.
