The Puerto Rico Court of Appeals recently ruled in a significant case involving Super Asphalt Pavement Corp. and Tallaboa PR, LLC. The court decided to uphold a lower court's order allowing Tallaboa to seize assets from Super Asphalt to secure a debt of over $4.5 million. This ruling impacts the companies involved and highlights the legal complexities surrounding debt collection and asset seizure in Puerto Rico.
The case, filed under docket number TA2026CE00590, began when Super Asphalt and its subsidiary, Asphalt Solutions Toa Alta, LLC, sought a review of a lower court's decision. The court's ruling is crucial as it affects how debts can be enforced and the rights of companies in financial distress.
Background
The dispute centers around Super Asphalt and its dealings with Tallaboa PR, a company that supplied asphalt to Super Asphalt for various construction projects. In November 2025, Super Asphalt and Asphalt Solutions Toa Alta filed a lawsuit against Tallaboa, claiming they had overpaid their debts under a Forbearance Agreement. They argued that they had paid $1,789,629.60 more than required and sought a refund of this amount, along with additional costs and fees.
In response, Tallaboa filed its own lawsuit against Super Asphalt and its insurer, Mapfre, in December 2025, claiming that Super Asphalt had defaulted on the payment agreement. Tallaboa sought the total amount owed, which was $4,531,405.51, and requested a preventive seizure of Super Asphalt's assets to secure this debt. The lower court eventually granted this request, prompting Super Asphalt to appeal the decision.
The Ruling
The Court of Appeals, led by Judge Santiago Calderón and joined by Judges Rodríguez Casillas and Barresi Ramos, ruled against Super Asphalt's appeal. The court stated, “The concession of provisional remedies in securing a judgment... constitutes a matter that rests on the sound discretion of the lower court, whose determinations deserve great deference.” This ruling means that the lower court's order for asset seizure remains in effect.
The court found that Tallaboa had a substantial claim against Super Asphalt and that the preventive seizure of assets was necessary to ensure the effectiveness of a future judgment. The judges noted that the lower court had adequately considered the evidence and determined that the debt was liquid, due, and enforceable.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for Super Asphalt and its operations. The court's decision to allow the preventive seizure of assets underscores the importance of adhering to contractual obligations and the potential consequences of failing to do so. Companies facing similar financial challenges may find themselves at risk of asset seizure if they do not meet their payment agreements.
The ruling also sets a precedent for how courts in Puerto Rico handle disputes related to debt collection and asset protection. It reinforces the idea that courts can take decisive action to protect creditors’ rights when there is a clear and enforceable debt.