In re: Juan Ramon Gracia Gil and Yessenia Marquez Felix v. Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito de Isabela

• Court: United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico
• Decided: March 9, 2017
• Docket: 16-00135
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

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

4 IN RE: CASE NO. 10-11227 5 6 JUAN RAMON GRACIA GIL YESSENIA MARQUEZ FELIX 7

8 9 Debtors Chapter 7

11 12 JUAN RAMON GRACIA GIL Adversary No. 16-0135 YESSENIA MARQUEZ FELIX 13

14 Plaintiffs 15 vs.

16 COOPERATIVA DE AHORRO Y 17 CREDITO DE ISABELA

18 Defendant FILED & ENTERED ON 03/09/2017

21 OPINION & ORDER 22 Before this Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Liability 23 24 (“Motion”) filed on 2/03/2017 [Dkt. No. 15]. This Motion was unopposed by the Defendant 25 despite receiving notice of the Motion and time to object.1 For the reasons set forth below, the

Plaintiffs’ Motion is GRANTED. The role of summary judgment is to look behind the facade of the pleadings and assay the

1 The Court refers Defendant to PR LBR 5005-4(g). 1 parties' proof in order to determine whether a trial is required. Under Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 56(c), made 2 applicable in bankruptcy by Fed.R.Bankr.P., Rule 7056, a summary judgment is available if the 3 pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the 4 5 affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party 6 is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Borges ex rel. S.M.B.W. v. Serrano- 7 Isern, 605 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2010). As to issues on which the movant, at trial, would be compelled 8 9 to carry the burden of proof, it must identify those portions of the pleadings which it believes 10 demonstrates that there is no genuine issue of material fact. In re Edgardo Ryan Rijos & Julia E. 11 Cruz Nieves v. Banco Bilbao Vizcaya & Citibank, 263 B.R. 382, 388 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 2001). 12 13 Even when a motion for summary judgment is unopposed, the court is not relieved of its duty 14 to decide whether the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Likewise, the court must 15 still assess whether the moving party has fulfilled its burden of demonstrating that there is no 16 17 genuine issue of material fact. In an unopposed motion for summary judgment, the court is still 18 obliged to consider the motion on its merits, in light of the record as constituted, in order to 19 determine whether judgment would be legally appropriate. Aguiar-Carrasquillo v. Agosto-Alicea, 20 21 445 F.3d 19 (1st Cir.2006).2 22 It is well-settled that “before granting an unopposed summary judgment motion, the court 23

24 2 Entry of a summary judgment motion as unopposed does not automatically give rise to a grant of 25 summary judgment. Instead, “the district court [is] still obliged to consider the motion on its merits, in light of the record as constituted, in order to determine whether judgment would be legally appropriate.” Mullen v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 972 F.2d 446, 452 (1st Cir.1992). “Even when faced with an unopposed motion for summary judgment, a court still has the obligation to test the undisputed facts in the crucible of the applicable law in order to ascertain whether judgment is warranted.” Mendez v. Banco Popular de Puerto Rico, 900 F.2d 4, 7 (1st Cir.1990); Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e)); Pico Vidal v. Ruiz Alvarado, 377 B.R. 788 (D.P.R., 2007). 1 must inquire whether the moving party has met its burden to demonstrate undisputed facts entitling it 2 to summary judgment as a matter of law.” Lopez v. Corporacion Azucarera de Puerto Rico, 938 F.2d 3 1510, 1517 (1st Cir.1991). Accordingly, we emphasize that courts "in considering a motion for 4 5 summary judgment, must review the motion, even if unopposed, and determine from what it has 6 before it whether the moving party is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law." Custer v. 7 Pan Am. Life Ins. Co., 12 F.3d 410, 416 (4th Cir.1993). 8 9 Factual Background 10 This complaint stems from Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito de Isabela’s (Cooperativa) 11 collection of Plaintiff’s monies in violation of the discharge injunction pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 524. 12 13 Plaintiffs/Debtors filed bankruptcy under Chapter 7 on November 30, 2010. Cooperativa was 14 included as a creditor, listed in the master address list and in the list of creditors filed in this case. 15 The Cooperativa was duly notified and knew of the filing of the bankruptcy petition, as evidenced 16 17 from the filing of claim number 6 on April 4, 2011. The Plaintiffs’ discharge was entered on 18 September 2, 2011 [Dkt. No. 38]. On or about March 3, 2016, Cooperativa filed a foreclosure 19 action in the Humacao Court of First Instance of Puerto Rico against Plaintiffs, case number 20 21 HSCI2016-00237, seeking to seize and foreclose the real property that guaranteed the discharged 22 debt, and further moved for judgment against Plaintiffs personally if the proceeds of the public sale 23 were not sufficient to cover the amount of the alleged debt. 24 25 After reviewing the Plaintiffs’ arguments, and the relevant law, this Court determines that

there is no triable issue as to any material facts and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court concludes after a review of the documents provided by Plaintiffs that they have met their burden in terms of producing adequate affirmative evidence. 1 In the instant case, Defendant’s collection efforts against Plaintiffs after they filed fo 2 bankruptcy protection and obtained a discharge on September 2, 2011, constitute a willful violatio 3 4 || of the discharge injunction, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 524. ° THEREFORE, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Liability shall be an 6 is hereby GRANTED. The Clerk’s Office will schedule a trial to consider the awarding of damages| 7 g || A joint pre-trial report will be filed seven (7) days prior to the trial date set by the Clerk. Judgmen 9 || will be entered accordingly. 10 SO ORDERED. 11 12 In San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 9" day of March, 2017. 13 — Se Bie 15 Brian K. Tester 16 U.S. Bankruptcy Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25