The Court of Appeals of Puerto Rico has upheld a ruling requiring Yesef Yair Cordero Lebrón and Lilliam Torres Marín to pay Banco Popular de Puerto Rico (BPPR) a total of $91,926.10. This amount includes $49,758.40 in principal, $42,167.70 in accrued interest, and $5,000 in attorney fees. The ruling, made on May 18, 2026, comes after the couple defaulted on a loan taken out by their now-defunct business, Cordero & Associates Law Firm, LLC.

This decision affects Cordero and Torres directly, as they now face significant financial obligations. The court's ruling emphasizes the importance of fulfilling contractual obligations and highlights the legal complexities surrounding loan agreements and their enforcement.

Background

The dispute began when Banco Popular de Puerto Rico filed a lawsuit against Cordero and Torres on January 18, 2024, seeking to collect on a loan originally granted to their law firm in 2003. The couple had signed documents guaranteeing the loan, which was for $50,000 with fluctuating interest rates. The bank claimed that the couple failed to make payments, leading to the lawsuit.

Cordero and Torres argued that the bank's claim was barred by the statute of limitations, asserting that the bank had failed to act within the required time frame to collect the debt. They contended that the applicable statute should allow for a three-year limit under the Law of Commercial Transactions, which they believed applied to their loan agreement.

After several procedural motions, the couple filed a motion for summary judgment in June 2024, claiming that the bank's action was time-barred. However, the bank countered with its own motion for summary judgment, asserting that the couple was liable for the debt based on their guarantees.

The Ruling

The Court of Appeals, presided over by Judges Hernández Sánchez, Rivera Torres, and Marrero Guerrero, reviewed the case and confirmed the lower court's ruling. The court found that the couple had indeed defaulted on their obligations and that the bank had acted within the legal timeframe to collect the debt.

The court ruled, "The debt was liquid, due, and enforceable, thus confirming the lower court's decision to grant summary judgment in favor of Banco Popular."

The court rejected the couple's argument regarding the statute of limitations, explaining that the bank's actions did not fall under the provisions they cited. Instead, the court determined that the applicable statute of limitations was fifteen years under the Civil Code, which allowed the bank's claim to proceed.

Impact

This ruling sets a significant precedent for similar cases involving loan agreements and guarantees in Puerto Rico. It reinforces the notion that parties who sign loan guarantees are held accountable for the debts incurred, even if the original borrower is no longer operational. The decision also clarifies the application of different statutes of limitations depending on the nature of the debt and the agreements involved.

Moving forward, this ruling may influence how banks and borrowers approach loan agreements, particularly regarding the clarity of terms and the obligations of guarantors. It highlights the importance of understanding the legal implications of signing such agreements and the potential consequences of defaulting on them.

What's Next

Cordero and Torres may have the option to appeal the decision to a higher court, but details about any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case could have lasting implications for their financial situation and for other borrowers in similar circumstances.