ST. CROIX — A District Court judge has once again found plaintiff Ida Smith in contempt of court, entering judgment against her and ordering her to pay more than $71,986.53 in fines and attorneys’ fees in a 15-year St. John land dispute.
Chief Judge Robert Molloy ruled against Smith in a seven-page judgment and order dated July 30. The ruling came after Smith failed to appear in person, despite a court order requiring her attendance, at a March 11 hearing on her motions to vacate an earlier contempt order. Attorney Maria Tankenson Hodge appeared on behalf of the defendants — siblings Paul Hoffman and Jane Hoffman.
Smith, who ran for delegate to Congress in the 2024 general election, was disqualified from running for the same office this year because of a dispute over the St. John address listed on her nomination papers — Estate 14 John’s Folly No. 14I-D. According to the supervisor of elections, the address was not an occupiable residence.
Smith claimed in a March 24, 2011 District Court lawsuit that she was a legal heir to the remnant lands of Estate 14 John’s Folly in Coral Bay that was deeded to her ancestors over 100 years ago. She subsequently filed a first and second amended complaint, asking the court to determine that certain property the defendants claimed as part of Estate Friis was in fact part of Estate John’s Folly and grant her ownership of that property.
The Hoffmans argued the boundary dispute had already been resolved by decades of federal litigation, including rulings issued in 1970 and 1993. On Sept. 30, 2015, then-District Judge Curtis Gómez agreed and dismissed Smith’s claims.
Molloy wrote that Smith’s absence from the March 11 hearing she herself had requested, combined with her continued refusal to comply with the court’s orders, left him no choice but to convert the daily $100 fines he had previously imposed into a fixed judgment. He therefore found Smith in contempt for her continued violation of the court’s orders and for her failure to appear at the March hearing and entered judgment in favor of the Hoffmans.
The ruling solidifies financial penalties stemming from Molloy’s previous order on March 31, 2025. That original order imposed a $100 per day fine against Smith until she purged herself of contempt by removing two improperly filed notices of lis pendens — public notices that a property is subject to ongoing litigation — on property located in Parcel No. 1 Estate Friis.
READ MORE: Federal judge finds Ida Smith in contempt for violating court orders in St. John land dispute case
Under the new order, Molloy converted the daily fines into a fixed, unavoidable judgment of $34,500 for the period between March 31, 2025, and March 11, 2026. The court also ordered Smith to pay outstanding attorneys’ fee awards of $19,712.50 and $17,774.03, plus statutory interest, that were previously awarded in connection with prior judgments and attorney fees dating back to September 2016. She must also pay the Hoffmans’ costs and attorneys’ fees for defending against her motions to vacate, as well as the Hoffmans’ costs for removing and disposing of items Smith illegally placed on their property. The order also makes clear the Hoffmans bear no liability for removing or disposing of anything Smith left on their land.
Beyond the financial penalties, Molloy’s order highlighted safety concerns, noting Smith had filed submissions with the court containing “what can only be interpreted as death threats or, at the very least, threats of physical violence, addressed to the defendants.” In a footnote to the order, Molloy cited a sworn declaration in which Smith said she would “stand her ground,” as well as an affidavit submitted by Harold Thomas III, who also claimed to be an heir to the Estate John’s Folly property along with Smith. In his affidavit, Thomas made reference to a previous court order to determine the external boundary lines to Estate 14 John’s Folly, writing that “to do otherwise is to cause bloodshed.” Molloy also noted that Smith’s cousin Ademola Olugebefola made a statement that could be perceived as a threat, stating: “My family and I will not continue to be on the defense against landgrabbers, we will stand our ground.”
Molloy’s order imposed restrictions on Smith going forward, prohibiting her from contacting or organizing any contact with the defendants or their children or family members, prohibiting her or anyone acting on her behalf from entering Parcel No. 1 Estate Friis, and requiring her to maintain a distance of at least 100 feet from the defendants and their attorneys at all times and in all places. Smith is also barred from obstructing, impeding, or interfering with any work undertaken on the Friis property.
An additional filing suggests the conduct at issue in the case extended beyond the daily fines and the missed March hearing. In a June 22 filing, the Hoffmans’ attorney, Mark Hodge, asked the court for leave to submit additional evidence of Smith’s continued defiance. According to the motion, a letter dated April 15 was sent by certified mail to Rachel Walker — Jane Hoffman’s daughter. The letter, attached to the filing as an exhibit, was sent by Smith’s mother, America Hodge Smith, who identified herself as a beneficiary of a family trust and repeated the same land claims at issue in the underlying case. The Hoffman’s attorney argued in the motion that Smith had enlisted her mother in an apparent attempt to circumvent the court’s restrictions on contact with the family. When that letter failed to draw a response, the motion states, Smith sent the same document to Walker herself, under her own name, by regular mail on June 20.
Similar to Smith’s original lawsuit, the letter lays out a chain-of-title argument dating to 1871, calling on the Hoffmans to erase any records asserting ownership of the disputed parcel. It threatens unspecified enforcement proceedings, contempt actions, and reporting violations to appropriate federal and international authorities if the family refuses. Hodge, in his motion, noted Smith persists in her “attacks” on the defendants and their children, in full disregard of the court’s orders. He stated it was clear that Smith would not cease her contemptuous conduct without a further order of the court imposing significant penalties for such continued conduct.
The court also ordered that Smith’s two notices of lis pendens — filed in 2011 and 2016 — and a document she recorded titled “Notice of Certificate of Acceptance and Declarations of Assignees Update of Patent” be stricken from the record at the Office of the Recorder of Deeds for St. Thomas and St. John, having been “designated as judicially without validity.”
Molloy warned that any further violation of the directives will subject Smith to penalties for criminal contempt of court.
