Cabrera v. International Restaurant Services, Inc., 3:22-cv-01449

Plaintiffs Cándida Cabrera and her husband sued Romano's Macaroni Grill Puerto Rico, Inc. and its insurer after Mrs. Cabrera fell while exiting a booth at the restaurant.
The incident occurred when Mrs. Cabrera's foot became entangled with a table base while leaving a half-moon booth atop a slightly elevated platform with no visual warning markers.
Plaintiffs argued this configuration created an unreasonably dangerous condition, asserting negligence in how objects (table, platform) were arranged in deviation from the original design.
Defendants moved for summary judgment and to exclude Plaintiffs’ expert, Engineer Otto González, arguing deficiencies in his methodology and failure to establish relevant standards of care.
The court found that most claims effectively amounted to negligent design allegations, for which specific standards and expert testimony are required under Puerto Rico law.
The court granted Defendants' motion to exclude Plaintiffs’ expert and dismissed all design-related claims, but allowed Plaintiffs’ simple negligence (failure to warn) claim to proceed to trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Plaintiffs’ claims are for simple negligence or negligent design	Claimed case is simple negligence due to object placement, not design; thus, no expert or standard required	Asserted the case is de facto negligent design, requiring expert evidence and standards	Court agreed with Defendants; most claims are design-based
Adequacy and admissibility of Plaintiffs’ expert testimony	González’s report sufficient, cited ANSI/OSHA and design deviations	Testimony unreliable, speculative, lacks supporting standards; expert unprepared	González’s testimony excluded; insufficient standard/evidence
Defendants' liability for use of a three-pronged table base and platform design	Design deviations from plans made booth area unreasonably dangerous	No code/regulation mandates design specifics; deviation alone not negligence	No liability absent specific standard; claim dismissed
Failure to warn as a basis for liability	Restaurant owed duty to warn of step/change in elevation	No prior similar incidents; not foreseeable; patrons saw step on entry	Failure to warn claim survives; jury must decide foreseeability

Vázquez-Filippetti v. Banco Popular de P.R., 504 F.3d 43 (1st Cir. 2007) (discussing elements of negligence and standard of care in premises liability under Puerto Rico law)
Woods-Leber v. Hyatt Hotels of P.R., Inc., 124 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 1997) (setting out premises liability and foreseeability requirements)
Calero-Cerezo v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 355 F.3d 6 (1st Cir. 2004) (standard for assessing summary judgment)
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (standards for admissibility of expert testimony)
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment burden-shifting)