On the contrary, at the end of the hearing counsel for VIPA stated that he had “no more business before the Court” and asked to be excused. (J.A. at 10.) Furthermore, Joseph first raised his defenses in a written motion filed one week before the hearing, and VIPA filed no response to the motion. “It is well established that failure to raise an issue in the [trial] court constitutes a waiver of the argument” on appeal. Gass v. V.I. Tel. Corp., 311 F.3d 237, 246, 45 V.I. 649 (3d Cir. 2002) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also Newark Morning Ledger, Co. v. United States, 539 F.2d 929, 932 (3d Cir. 1976). There is an exception to the general rule of waiver where exceptional circumstances are shown to exist. Brown v. Philip Morris Inc., 250 F.3d 789, 799 (3d Cir. 2001) (<HOLDING>). However, VIPA has not presented the Court
recognizing examples of exceptional circumstances where the public interest requires that the issues be heard or manifest injustice would result from the failure to consider such issues recognizing that issues raised for first time on appeal generally are not considered absent exceptional circumstances holding that such a threat would not supply exceptional circumstances holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal are generally waived absent exceptional circumstances recognizing that a court will ordinarily apply new legislation to pending cases unless manifest injustice would result