Vazquez-Robles v. Commoloco, Inc.
3:12-cv-01600
D.P.R.May 15, 2017Background
- Plaintiff Maribel Vazquez-Robles sued employer CommoLoCo alleging disability discrimination and failure to provide reasonable accommodation under Puerto Rico Law 44 and federal statutes; prior summary judgment disposed of all claims except the Law 44 failure-to-accommodate claim.
- CommoLoCo moved for summary judgment arguing the Law 44 claim is time-barred; Vazquez opposed, asserting tolling based on an administrative charge to the Puerto Rico Anti-Discrimination Unit (ADU).
- Vazquez filed an ADU charge on September 1, 2010 alleging disability discrimination and requesting that CommoLoCo "cease and desist." The alleged denial of accommodation occurred on August 24, 2010.
- Law 44 has a one-year statute of limitations; accrual is governed by federal law (when plaintiff knew or should have known of injury). The one-year clock began on August 25, 2010, making an August 25, 2011 deadline for suit.
- Vazquez filed the federal complaint on July 26, 2012, after the one-year period; the court analyzed whether the ADU filing or alleged insanity tolled the limitations period.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court should allow CommoLoCo's second motion for summary judgment | Vazquez contended the prior orders resolved Law 44 issues and implied the second motion was improper | CommoLoCo sought leave to move on timeliness; Rule 56 motion permitted by court discretion | Court allowed the second summary-judgment motion (Vazquez's procedural objection waived) |
| Whether Vazquez's ADU filing tolled the one-year statute of limitations | ADU charge tolled limitations until administrative proceeding concluded | ADU charge requested different relief (only cease-and-desist) and thus did not meet tolling requirements | Court held ADU filing did not toll the statute because it did not request the same relief (no damages demand) |
| Whether the Law 44 claim was timely filed | Vazquez argued tolling applied (ADU or incapacity) so claim timely | CommoLoCo argued the claim accrued Aug 25, 2010 and suit filed after one-year period, thus untimely | Court held the claim accrued Aug 25, 2010 and was filed after the limitations period — claim is time-barred |
| Whether plaintiff's mental condition tolled limitations under Puerto Rico Law 40 (insanity tolling) | Vazquez relied on evidence of severe back pain and depression to argue incapacity | CommoLoCo argued plaintiff failed to meet the Law 40 standard of incapacity to comprehend rights/administer affairs; burden on plaintiff | Court found plaintiff presented no evidence meeting the applicable insanity standard; statutory tolling not triggered |
Key Cases Cited
- Farmers Ins. Exch. v. RNK, Inc., 632 F.3d 777 (1st Cir. 2011) (summary-judgment genuine-dispute standard)
- Ruiz Rivera v. Pfizer Pharm., LLC, 521 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2008) (Law 44 harmonized with ADA)
- Rodriguez-Garcia v. Municipality of Caguas, 354 F.3d 91 (1st Cir. 2004) (accrual — when plaintiff knew or should have known)
- Benitez-Pons v. Commonwealth of P.R., 136 F.3d 54 (1st Cir. 1998) (timing and accrual principles)
- Riofrio Anda v. Ralston Purina Co., 959 F.2d 1149 (1st Cir. 1992) (administrative charge must plead same claim/relief to toll)
- U.S. v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 3 (1st Cir. 1990) (issues inadequately argued are waived)
- Torres v. Junto de Gobierno de Servicio de Emergencia, 91 F.Supp.3d 243 (D.P.R. 2015) (ADU filing tolls statute when same cause and relief alleged)
- Toledo-Colon v. P.R., 812 F.Supp.2d 110 (D.P.R. 2011) (one-year statute for Law 44 claims)