Gonzalez Ruiz, Lisoannette M v. Consejo De Tit De Condominio Los Corales
KLAN202401022
| Tribunal De Apelaciones De Pue... | Jan 23, 2025Background
- The case involves a dispute between the Consejo de Titulares (Board of Directors) of Condominio Los Corales and the Puerto Rico Department of Consumer Affairs (DACo) regarding compliance with an administrative order to produce documents related to an insurance claim from Hurricane María.
- DACo issued an order on October 13, 2023, requiring the Board to turn over specific documents within 20 days; the Board failed to comply, partly citing water damage from a leak as making compliance impossible.
- The issue escalated after DACo sought judicial enforcement in the Tribunal de Primera Instancia (TPI) when the Board did not meet the documentation deadline.
- The Board argued the order was impossible to comply with due to destruction of documents and sought dismissal, but DACo argued the Board had already been in default and acted negligently in preserving records.
- TPI ruled in favor of DACo, compelling compliance with the order and imposing a $500 attorney fee, rejecting the Board's impossibility defense as untimely and procedurally improper.
- The Board appealed, asserting error in TPI's summary disposition without considering factual controversies or defenses, particularly impossibility due to document loss after the administrative order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether TPI can enforce the DACo order without review of impossibility defenses | Board: Impossibility defense (documents destroyed) | DACo: Defense should have been raised earlier | TPI can only enforce; cannot revisit administrative rulings |
| Whether the Board's defenses merited further proceedings (fact finding/discovery) | Board: Factual dispute requires evidence | DACo: No—summary enforcement is proper | Summary enforcement is proper; later defenses raised in contempt |
| Application of impossibility doctrine as an excusing defense | Board: Destruction was unforeseeable, thus excusable | DACo: Negligence and default block defense | Impossibility not considered—procedure to raise was not followed |
| Jurisdiction of TPI in reviewing administrative orders from DACo | Board: TPI should consider all defenses | DACo: TPI authority only to enforce order | TPI jurisdiction limited to execution, not review |
Key Cases Cited
- Ortiz Matías v. Mora Development, 187 DPR 649 (P.R. 2013) (differentiates enforcement and review of administrative orders)
- Industria Cortinera, Inc. v. PRTC, 132 DPR 654 (P.R. 1993) (enforcement of final, firm administrative orders by courts)
- Díaz Aponte v. Comunidad San José, Inc., 130 DPR 782 (P.R. 1992) (tribunals' role in enforcing administrative determinations)