In re: Guillermo Acevedo & Norma I Fuster, PSC v. Wigberto Lugo Mender; Praderas del Mar, Inc., Armando Sanchez Crespo, Corporation AB and C, Insurance Company X Y and Z, John Doe, Jane Doe, Mary Doe

CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico
DecidedOctober 16, 2012
Docket11-00054
StatusUnknown

This text of In re: Guillermo Acevedo & Norma I Fuster, PSC v. Wigberto Lugo Mender; Praderas del Mar, Inc., Armando Sanchez Crespo, Corporation AB and C, Insurance Company X Y and Z, John Doe, Jane Doe, Mary Doe (In re: Guillermo Acevedo & Norma I Fuster, PSC v. Wigberto Lugo Mender; Praderas del Mar, Inc., Armando Sanchez Crespo, Corporation AB and C, Insurance Company X Y and Z, John Doe, Jane Doe, Mary Doe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re: Guillermo Acevedo & Norma I Fuster, PSC v. Wigberto Lugo Mender; Praderas del Mar, Inc., Armando Sanchez Crespo, Corporation AB and C, Insurance Company X Y and Z, John Doe, Jane Doe, Mary Doe, (prb 2012).

Opinion

1 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO 2

3 IN RE:

4 GUILLERMO ACEVEDO & NORMA I FUSTER, PSC CASE NO. 09-10590 EAG

5 Debtor(s) Chapter 7

6 WIGBERTO LUGO MENDER ADVERSARY CASE NO. 11-00054

7 Plaintiff(s)

8 PRADERAS DEL MAR, INC., ARMANDO SANCHEZ CRESPO, CORPORATION AB AND C, INSURANCE 9 COMPANY X Y AND Z, JOHN DOE, JANE DOE, 10 MARY DOE

11 Defendant(s)

12 FILED & ENTERED ON 10/16/2012 13

14 OPINION AND ORDER 15

16 The plaintiff's Motion Requesting Order for Payment by Defendants of 17 Attorney fees and expenses (docket #36), is granted in part and denied in 18 part. 19 To the extent plaintiff's motion seeks to an order of garnishment to 20 collect the judgment in the amount of $11,026.02, the request is granted. 21 22 To the extent that the motion seeks attorney's fees and costs 23 relating to costs of execution of the judgment under 32 LPRA Ap. V, R. 24 51.10, the request is denied without prejudice for failure to comply with 25 the requirements of that rule. The request for costs of execution of

judgment is neither accompanied by a sworn statement of the plaintiff or the certification of the plaintiff's attorney. See Pinero Fernandez v. Martinez Santiago, 104 D.P.R. 587 (1976). Also, the request is premature, because R. 51.10 requires that the request be made within ten (10) days 1 |jiof the judgment being collected in its entirety. Here, by its o 2 admission, plaintiff has not yet been able to collect the judgment. Plaintiff is to submit proposed forms of order and proposed forms o 4 writs of garnishment within 21 days. Order due by 11/07/2012. 6 SO ORDERED. 7 San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 16 day of October, 2012. 8 9

11 Edward A oy 12 U.S. Bankruptcy Judge 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

Related

Piñero Fernández v. Martínez Santiago
104 P.R. Dec. 587 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In re: Guillermo Acevedo & Norma I Fuster, PSC v. Wigberto Lugo Mender; Praderas del Mar, Inc., Armando Sanchez Crespo, Corporation AB and C, Insurance Company X Y and Z, John Doe, Jane Doe, Mary Doe, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-guillermo-acevedo-norma-i-fuster-psc-v-wigberto-lugo-mender-prb-2012.