In re: 422 Corporation and Banco Popular de Puerto Rico v. United Surety & Indemnity Company; Puerto Rico Public Housing Administration and Julie Lorenzo

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico·Decided August 6, 2007·No. 05-00251·Unknown

Opinion

THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO 2

3 IN RE:

4 422 CORPORATION CASE NO. 05-03276 BKT

Debtor(s) Chapter 11 5

Adversary No. 05-00251 6

8 Plaintiff(s)

10 UNITED SURETY & INDEMNITY COMPANY; FILED & ENTERED ON 08/06/2007 PUERTO RICO PUBLIC HOUSING

12 Defendant(s)

13 OPINION AND ORDER 14

15 This opinion adjudicates the following pending matters: (1) Banco Popular de Puerto Rico’s 16 (“BPPR”) Motion requesting additional findings of fact (Dkt. No. 156); (2) BPPR’s motion to alter 17 18 or amend Judgment pursuant to Rule 9023 (Dkt. No. 158); and (3)United Surety and Indemnity 19 Company’s (“USIC”) motions in opposition to BPPR’s requests (Dkt. Nos. 166 and 167). The Court 20 took the matters raised in Plaintiff and Defendant’s motions under advisement. 21 22 BPPR’s motions requesting additional findings of fact and to alter or amend judgment rest on 23 the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(b) as incorporated by the Federal Rule of 24 Bankruptcy Procedure 7052, and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) as incorporated by Federal 25 Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9023. Plaintiff states all relevant facts established by the evidence presented “must be declared and considered if the judgment is to have any basis on reality, honor due process and the respective rights of the parties” (See, BPPR’s Motion Dkt. No. 156, page 2). F. R. Civ. P 52(b) provides that upon motion of a party made not later than ten (10) days after entry of 1 judgment, the court may amend its findings of fact, or make additional findings and may amend the 2 judgment accordingly. Similarly, F. R. Civ. P. 59(e) allows the Court to alter or amend the judgment 3 if a motion is timely filed no later than ten (10) days after the entry of judgment. Plaintiff BPPR cites 4 5 National Metal Finishing Co. v. Barclays American/Commercial, Inc. , 899 F.2d 119 (1990) in 6 support of its position that the Court may, as a result of amended or additional findings, reverse its 7 initial judgement. More recently, in Raul A. Muriel Morales v. United States of America, 2007 WL 8 9 1387279 (D. Puerto Rico, 2007) the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico 10 reiterated that a motion for reconsideration is treated as a motion under Rule 59(e). These motions 11 12 should be granted to correct manifest errors of law or to present newly discovered evidence (See, 13 F.D.I.C. v. World Univ. Inc., 978 F.2d 10, 16 (1st Cir. 1992). However, BPPR fails to address an 14 integral part of the holdings of these cases which state that Rule 59(e) motions are not appropriate if 15 16 they merely repeat old arguments previously considered and rejected by this Court. For these reasons, 17 motions for reconsideration are “extraordinary remedies which should be used sparingly” and are 18 “typically denied.” (See, National Metal Finishing Co., 899 F.2d at 123). Moreover, the trial court’s 19 20 obligation is to clearly relate the findings of fact upon which its decision rests in “brief, definitive, 21 pertinent findings” to the legal conclusions that are found. (See, Supermercados Econo, Inc. V. 22 Integrand Assurance Company, 375 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2004)). 23 24 In order for the judgment to be amended or altered, Plaintiff must bring forth new evidence, 25 raise manifest errors or novel theories of law that would warrant reconsideration of this Court’s

judgement entered on June 19, 2007. This Court finds that BPPR has not met any of these requirements. Accordingly, and having reviewed the record, the Motion Requesting Additional Findings of Fact Pursuant to FRCP 52(b) and the Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment pursuant to 1 || FRCP 59(e) are hereby DENIED. In addition, USIC’s requests for the imposition of sanctions, 2 ; attorney fees, and costs are hereby DENIED.

5 San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 06 day of August, 2007. 6 □□□ 8 rian K. Tester U.S. Bankruptcy Judge 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re: 422 Corporation and Banco Popular de Puerto Rico v. United Surety & Indemnity Company; Puerto Rico Public Housing Administration and Julie Lorenzo, (prb 2007).

In re: 422 Corporation and Banco Popular de Puerto Rico v. United Surety & Indemnity Company; Puerto Rico Public Housing Administration and Julie Lorenzo (In re: 422 Corporation and Banco Popular de Puerto Rico v. United Surety & Indemnity Company; Puerto Rico Public Housing Administration and Julie Lorenzo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related