Gonzalez Aponte, Jose M v. Santana Baez, Iris A
KLAN202400825
Tribunal De Apelaciones De Pue...Oct 15, 2024Background
- Plaintiffs (Ocasio Lozada and González Aponte) and defendant (Santana Báez) own neighboring properties in the Urb. Parque de Isla Verde, Carolina, Puerto Rico.
- Santana constructed several additions (carport, stairs, and expansions) on her property without a valid construction permit.
- The Municipality initially approved the construction, but after challenge by the plaintiffs, the Division of Administrative Reviews (DRA) revoked the permit and its decision became final.
- Plaintiffs filed for an injunction and demolition under Article 14.1 of the Ley para la Reforma del Proceso de Permisos (Law 161-2009), asserting the construction was illegal.
- Santana moved to dismiss the case, arguing the administrative process wasn’t concluded and that court action was premature, but the trial court denied her motion, ordered demolition, and found her defense to be frivolous/temerarious.
- Santana appealed, arguing procedural defects and lack of finality in the administrative process.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the construction was illegal without a valid permit | The permit was revoked; construction is illegal | The municipal permit was authorized | Permit revocation was final; illegal |
| Whether administrative process was complete | Administrative review was final and adverse to Santana | Process was not finished due to notice issues | Review was final; no further recourse |
| Whether the claim was ripe for judicial action | All administrative remedies were exhausted | Action was premature due to ongoing processes | Claim was ripe after DRA revocation |
| Whether Santana acted temerariously in defending action | Cited continued defense despite clear illegality | Claimed her actions were justified | Defense was reckless/temerarious |
Key Cases Cited
- Casillas Carrasquillo v. ELA, 209 DPR 240 (P.R. 2022) (Regarding standards for judicial dismissal motions, including for lack of claim).
- López García v. López García, 200 DPR 50 (P.R. 2018) (Standards for reviewing facts in pleadings on a motion to dismiss).
- González Méndez v. Acción Social et al., 196 DPR 213 (P.R. 2016) (Reinforcing principle that well-pleaded facts are accepted as true on motion to dismiss).
- Pressure Vessels PR v. Empire Gas PR, 137 DPR 497 (P.R. 1994) (Demands are interpreted liberally in plaintiff's favor for motions to dismiss).