Cruz-Cedeno v. Vega-Moral, 150 F.4th 1

Plaintiffs (the parents and relatives of a deceased child) sued various medical providers, alleging malpractice after their child’s death in 2016 following convulsions and seizures and treatment by Dr. Vega and others.
Plaintiffs first filed suit in Puerto Rico Commonwealth court in 2017 against unnamed doctors and medical centers, but did not name Dr. Vega. This complaint was dismissed without prejudice in 2018.
In 2019, Plaintiffs filed a new case in federal court, this time naming Dr. Vega and others.
Dr. Vega moved for summary judgment, arguing the claims against him were barred by Puerto Rico's one-year statute of limitations for tort actions, as he wasn't named in the first suit.
The district court granted summary judgment to Dr. Vega, finding that Plaintiffs failed to prove the lawsuit against him was timely, and denied Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration.
On appeal, Plaintiffs challenged the summary judgment and reconsideration denials, focusing on the burden of proof for tolling the statute of limitations, and whether Dr. Vega had properly asserted the defense.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Vega assert the limitations defense in his answer?	Vega admitted limitations were tolled; argument made only after summary judgment	Omitted "not" was an error; properly intended as defense	Argument waived by not raising pre-summary judgment
Burden to prove timeliness/tolling	Burden never shifted to them because Vega’s SJ filing was deficient	Burden properly shifted upon raising of defense, as action filed past limitations	Burden shifted to plaintiffs to show tolling
Did plaintiffs meet burden to show suit was timely?	Commonwealth complaint tolled limitations or reset timeline; later argued Dr. Vega was an unknown/solidary defendant	Federal case was brought more than one year after death and Vega not named in first case	Plaintiffs failed to show tolling as to Dr. Vega
Motion for reconsideration	Court should consider late-filed arguments/evidence to avoid injustice	No justification for late arguments; no error in court's process	No abuse of discretion in denying reconsideration

Klunder v. Brown Univ., 778 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2015) (summary judgment standard, facts viewed in light most favorable to non-movant)
Rodríguez v. Suzuki Motor Corp., 570 F.3d 402 (1st Cir. 2009) (burden on plaintiff to show tolling once limitations defense raised under PR law)
Bonilla-Aviles v. Southmark San Juan, Inc., 992 F.2d 391 (1st Cir. 1993) (defendant establishes limitations by showing complaint filed >1 year after event; plaintiff must then create a factual dispute on tolling)
Pina v. Children's Place, 740 F.3d 785 (1st Cir. 2014) (party with burden at trial must produce competent evidence to rebut summary judgment)
Merrimon v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 758 F.3d 46 (1st Cir. 2014) (waiver of arguments not made before district court prior to summary judgment)