Puerto Rico Industrial Commercial v. Tcg Investments, LLC.
KLCE202500070
| Tribunal De Apelaciones De Pue... | Feb 13, 2025Background
- Puerto Rico Industrial Commercial Holdings Biotech Corp. (PR Industrial) filed a sworn complaint against TCG Investments LLC for collection of $257,616.65 due to alleged breach of contract over unpaid invoices for cannabis medicinal products delivered between 2021 and 2023.
- PR Industrial sought a provisional remedy (preventive embargo) under Rule 56 of Civil Procedure to secure potential payment, claiming risk of asset dissipation by TCG Investments.
- The trial court (Tribunal de Primera Instancia, TPI) denied the provisional remedy at that procedural stage, but scheduled an initial conference where provisional remedies could be reconsidered based on arguments and evidence from both parties.
- TCG Investments challenged this interlocutory decision via certiorari, arguing the trial court erred by allowing continued consideration of provisional remedies after denying PR Industrial's motion.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed whether the TPI abused its discretion or misapplied procedural rules in its handling of PR Industrial's request for provisional relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether provisional relief (preventive embargo) was warranted | Payment is owed, risk of asset dissipation | Allegations are speculative, insufficient proof | Not warranted at this stage; further hearing scheduled |
| Trial court's discretion to set further hearing on provisional relief | Court should decide at this stage or grant relief | Denial closed the matter unless new petition filed | No abuse of discretion; court may revisit issue at hearing |
| Whether certiorari should issue to review interlocutory decision | Immediate review needed to prevent prejudice | No urgent prejudice, process should continue | Certiorari denied; no urgent basis for appellate review |
| Principles of procedural finality and the right to be heard | Denial = final resolution unless new motion | Court may maintain flexibility for justice | Court’s process does not violate due process or finality |
Key Cases Cited
- Rivera v. Arcos Dorados, 212 DPR 194 (P.R. 2023) (sets standard for appellate review of error in trial court procedure)
- Torres González v. Zaragoza Meléndez, 211 DPR 81 (P.R. 2023) (discretion of trial courts in procedural matters)
- León v. Rest. El Tropical, 154 DPR 249 (P.R. 2001) (criteria for certiorari and appellate intervention)
- Caribbean Orthopedics v. Medshape, 207 DPR 994 (P.R. 2021) (scope of certiorari for interlocutory orders)
- Scotiabank v. ZAF Corp., 202 DPR 478 (P.R. 2019) (limits of review under certiorari procedure)
- García v. Padró, 165 DPR 324 (P.R. 2005) (definition of abuse of discretion in judicial processes)