KLAN202401027
Tribunal De Apelaciones De Pue...May 30, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs (Walter García Sánchez and Keyla Nazario Delgado) filed a complaint against the Municipality of Humacao and other parties, alleging damages from a workplace accident on January 11, 2023, where García Sánchez suffered severe eye injury while working as a municipal employee.
- Plaintiffs claimed violations of several statutes, including Puerto Rico's municipal liability law and various anti-discrimination and anti-harassment provisions.
- The Municipality filed a motion to dismiss, arguing plaintiffs failed to satisfy the jurisdictional requirement of timely written notice to the mayor within 90 days of learning of their damages, as mandated by Art. 1.051 of the Puerto Rico Municipal Code.
- The trial court granted partial dismissal against the Municipality, holding the plaintiffs failed to provide required notice and that the claim was time-barred.
- Plaintiffs moved for reconsideration, arguing incapacity to give notice and that the complaint or prior actions interrupted prescription; the trial court denied reconsideration.
- Plaintiffs appealed, challenging dismissal and arguing the trial court abused its discretion by not allowing discovery or an evidentiary hearing on incapacity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to notify municipality in 90 days | García Sánchez was incapacitated, excusing notice | No valid, timely notice; incapacity not properly alleged | Dismissal upheld; strict compliance required |
| Prescription/interruption of claim | Actions (letters, complaints, etc.) interrupted term | Only proper notice by claimant interrupts, none given | No interruption; claim time-barred |
| Evidentiary hearing/discovery on incapacity | Court abused discretion by not allowing them | Not warranted; incapacity not properly alleged in complaint | No abuse; court acted within its discretion |
| Compliance with procedural rules for reconsideration | Motion timely and specific per Rule 47 | Not at issue; dismissed on substantive grounds | Reconsideration properly denied; no error |
Key Cases Cited
- Rivera Fernández v. Mun. Carolina, 190 DPR 196 (Puerto Rico 2014) (strict compliance with municipal notice is jurisdictional and mandatory)
- Acevedo v. Mun. de Aguadilla, 153 DPR 788 (Puerto Rico 2001) (notice requirement has strictly enforced jurisdictional nature)
- Méndez v. Alcalde de Aguadilla, 151 DPR 853 (Puerto Rico 2000) (failure to notify municipality within statutory period is fatal)
- López v. Autoridad de Carreteras, 133 DPR 243 (Puerto Rico 1993) (notification requirements for municipal claims)
- Romero Arroyo v. ELA, 127 DPR 724 (Puerto Rico 1991) (notification as condition precedent to suit against municipality)
- Meléndez Gutiérrez v. ELA, 113 DPR 811 (Puerto Rico 1983) (jurisdictional impact of missed municipality notice)