The Puerto Rico Court of Appeals recently ruled against Gabriela Torres Negrón and her company, Mejor Gusto LLC, in a legal dispute involving a contract and alleged financial misconduct. The court's decision, delivered on May 19, 2026, affects Torres Negrón's ability to present key expert testimony in her case against Raúl Nicolás Gómez Betancourt. This ruling highlights the importance of adhering to legal deadlines in civil litigation.
The case originated when Torres Negrón filed a lawsuit on October 13, 2023, alleging illegal appropriation and fraud against Gómez. She claimed that he unlawfully withdrew over $138,000 from Mejor Gusto's bank account without her consent. Torres Negrón sought a court order to return the funds and to amend the company’s registration with the Department of State. However, the initial court denied her request for an urgent injunction on March 17, 2026, leading to the appeal.
During the proceedings, both parties presented expert witnesses to support their claims. Torres Negrón identified CPA Juan A. Rivera as her expert, while Gómez also announced his own expert. The timeline of the case saw numerous procedural steps, including a conference on December 17, 2025, where the court set deadlines for the submission of expert reports. However, the court later ruled that Torres Negrón's expert report was submitted too late, after the discovery period had ended.
The Court of Appeals, led by Judge Mateu Meléndez, reviewed the case after Torres Negrón filed a certiorari petition on April 30, 2026. She argued that the lower court had abused its discretion by allowing Gómez's expert report while excluding her own. The court, however, found no merit in her claims. The ruling stated, "The court does not authorize the use of the report of CPA Juan Rivera in reaction to the report of CPA Carlos Iglesias, which was delivered to the respondent on December 15, 2025, outside the discovery period."
The judges on the panel included Judge Rivera Marchand, Judge Boria Vizcarrondo, and Judge Robles Adorno. They concluded that the lower court acted within its discretion, emphasizing that the timing of submission was crucial in legal proceedings. The court noted that allowing Torres Negrón's expert report would create an unfair advantage, as she had ample time to submit her evidence.
This ruling has significant implications for Torres Negrón and Mejor Gusto LLC. It reinforces the necessity for parties in legal disputes to adhere strictly to procedural deadlines, especially regarding the submission of expert testimony. The decision also illustrates how courts prioritize procedural fairness and the orderly conduct of trials over the inclusion of potentially late evidence.
Moving forward, the ruling sets a precedent for similar cases in Puerto Rico, emphasizing that courts will not tolerate delays in the submission of evidence. This decision could deter parties from attempting to introduce late evidence, knowing that courts may exclude such submissions to maintain fairness in proceedings.
As for what’s next, Torres Negrón could potentially appeal this ruling to a higher court, but details were not available in the court filing regarding any plans for further legal action. The case remains significant as it highlights the ongoing legal challenges faced by business owners in Puerto Rico and the importance of compliance with legal procedures.