Order 1827-2020

Order No. 1827-2020 resolves two competing petitions filed after the material conclusion of the enforcement phase in the ordinary proceeding of high value. Lisa, S.A., through the law firm Grimas & Grimas, requested formal release of the attachment decreed under Order No. 1624-08. Villamorey, S.A., represented by Galindo, Arias & López, opposed the request and invoked Article 1080 of the Judicial Code to bar Lisa, S.A. from being heard for failure to prove payment of the costs award.

Tribunal's Analysis

The Eleventh Circuit Judge rejected both petitions as inadmissible, grounding her decision in the res judicata effect of the operative rulings. Order No. 2277-2018 had directed extinction of the $894,718.00 judgment through set-off against dividends retained by Villamorey, S.A. as judicial depositary, simultaneously dismantling the attachment. Sentence No. 42-08 (as modified by the First Superior Court) and Order No. 2277-2018 were final and executory, producing the legal effect of res judicata that precluded the court from ruling on matters already resolved.

The court clarified that no attachment remained to be lifted, as Order No. 2277-2018 had already rendered it without effect by ordering set-off. As to Villamorey, S.A.'s opposition, the court acknowledged the argument regarding Lisa, S.A.'s failure to prove payment of costs but declared it equally inadmissible for lack of a procedural object. No claims from Lisa, S.A. or its creditors concerning dividends owed by Villamorey, S.A. had been raised before this court, given that the attachment had been a product of the completed proceeding and the substantive issues were resolved by executory judgment.

"Al enjuiciar la suscrita las anteriores solicitudes de las partes, y confrontarlas con las constancias en autos, ambas resultan a todas luces inadmisibles por las razones que pasamos a explicar." (Page 2)

Ruling

• Both petitions declared inadmissible: Lisa, S.A.'s request for release of the attachment (folios 3019–3021) and Villamorey, S.A.'s opposition invoking Article 1080 of the Judicial Code (folios 3023–3028).
• The Clerk of Court ordered to register the file's exit in the Automated Judicial Management System (SAGJ) and remit it to the judicial archives.

Legal Basis

• Article 215 of the Constitution — constitutional authority for the administration of justice.
• Articles 1043 and 1081 of the Civil Code — govern set-off as a mechanism for extinguishing obligations.
• Articles 472, 481, and 495 of the Judicial Code — procedural rules on res judicata and the enforceability of judicial resolutions.

Signatories

• Lcda. María Leticia Cedeño Suira, Eleventh Circuit Civil Judge
• Lcda. Raquel Guzmán Fernández, Clerk of Court