In In re Infant Sherman, 49 V.I. 452, 456 (V.I. 2008), the petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration in the Superior Court, proffering for the first time academic literature and a psychologist's affidavit that were not filed with the original petition.
The Superior Court denied the motion, and on appeal the Court ruled that "if Appellant wanted the trial court to consider her policy arguments, psychologist's affidavit, and the related literature as evidence of the need of the trial court to appoint a guardian ad litem in response to the changing attitudes toward adoption proceedings, she should have presented that argument and evidence with her original petition. Where evidence is not newly discovered, a party may not submit that evidence in support of a motion for reconsideration. She failed to do so. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to appoint a guardian ad litem based on Appellant's untimely arguments and evidence." (Sherman, 49 V.I. at 458.)