Margarita Rubio Gonzalez, Etc. v. Media Elements, Inc.

946 F.2d 157, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23597, 1991 WL 200332
CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit
DecidedOctober 9, 1991
Docket90-2098
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 946 F.2d 157 (Margarita Rubio Gonzalez, Etc. v. Media Elements, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Margarita Rubio Gonzalez, Etc. v. Media Elements, Inc., 946 F.2d 157, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23597, 1991 WL 200332 (1st Cir. 1991).

Opinion

ORDER OF COURT

We grant the appellee’s motion to dismiss. The appellant did not oppose the motion; moreover, we agree with the ap-pellee that, in the circumstances presented by this case, federal abstention is appropriate under the doctrine of Burford v. Sun Oil Co., 319 U.S. 315, 63 S.Ct. 1098, 87 L.Ed. 1424 (1943). By enacting the Uniform Insurers Liquidation Act, 26 L.P.R.A. § 4001 et seq., Puerto Rico has constructed a comprehensive framework for the liquidation of insolvent insurance companies and the resolution of claims against them. Continued federal litigation may disrupt Puerto Rico’s regulatory system in three significant ways: (1) by taking jurisdiction away from the “central administrative forum” in which Puerto Rico’s legislature intended to concentrate all “claims against the corporation being liquidated, a method that promotes the orderly adjudication of same,” Calderon v. Commonwealth Insurance Co., 111 D.P.R. 153 (1981); (2) by forcing the Puerto Rico Insurance Commissioner to dissipate the insolvent insurer’s funds litigating a claim that could be settled more efficiently in the administrative forum; and (3) by creating the risk that Puerto Rico and the federal court will adopt different interpretations of the policy term at issue here, thus defeating the Commonwealth’s interest in a consistent disposition of all claims against the insolvent insurer. See generally Martin Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Prudential Reinsurance Co., 910 F.2d 249 (5th Cir.1990); Lac D’Amiante du Quebec v. American Home Assurance Co., 864 F.2d 1033 (3d Cir.1988); Grimes v. Crown Life Insurance Co., 857 F.2d 699 (10th Cir.1988); Law Enforcement Insurance Co., Ltd. v. Corcoran, 807 F.2d 38 (2d Cir.1986). But see Bilden v. United Equitable Insurance Co., 921 F.2d 822 (8th Cir.1990).

Appeal dismissed.

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

Related

Sevigny v. Employers Insurance
411 F.3d 24 (First Circuit, 2005)
First TN Bank v. Dale
Sixth Circuit, 2004
Callon Petroleum Co. v. Frontier Insurance
351 F.3d 204 (Fifth Circuit, 2003)
Munich American Reinsurance Co. v. Crawford
141 F.3d 585 (Fifth Circuit, 1998)
Mercado Boneta v. Fernandez
950 F. Supp. 432 (D. Puerto Rico, 1996)
Todd v. DSN Dealer Service Network, Inc.
861 F. Supp. 1531 (D. Kansas, 1994)
Ernst & Young v. Depositors Economic Protection Corp.
862 F. Supp. 709 (D. Rhode Island, 1994)
Costle v. Fremont Indemnity Co.
839 F. Supp. 265 (D. Vermont, 1993)
Garcia v. Island Program
First Circuit, 1993
Garcia v. Island Program Designer, Inc.
4 F.3d 57 (First Circuit, 1993)
De Conway v. Lopez
First Circuit, 1993
Doughty v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, London
812 F. Supp. 13 (D. Massachusetts, 1993)
General Railway Signal Co. v. Corcoran
807 F. Supp. 1361 (N.D. Illinois, 1992)
Garcia v. Island Program Designer, Inc.
791 F. Supp. 338 (D. Puerto Rico, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
946 F.2d 157, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23597, 1991 WL 200332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/margarita-rubio-gonzalez-etc-v-media-elements-inc-ca1-1991.