A recent ruling from the Puerto Rico Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court's decision regarding a property dispute between Edwin Mojica Rodríguez and Maricarmen Reyes Fajardo. The case, filed under docket number TA2026AP00578, centers on the ownership of a property acquired during their marriage and the implications of their divorce.
This ruling affects both parties significantly as it determines the rightful ownership of the property in question and whether Mojica Rodríguez can charge Reyes Fajardo rent for her continued occupancy. The decision also highlights the complexities of property ownership in the context of marriage and divorce in Puerto Rico.
Background
The dispute began when Edwin Mojica Rodríguez filed a lawsuit against Maricarmen Reyes Fajardo, claiming ownership of a property acquired during their marriage, which took place on January 15, 2000. The couple was married under a separation of property regime, meaning that each spouse retains ownership of their individual assets. Mojica Rodríguez asserts that he purchased the property, registered as finca number 54962, on November 30, 2004, using funds from a loan he secured independently.
After their divorce was finalized on April 5, 2013, Mojica Rodríguez vacated the property, leaving Reyes Fajardo as the sole occupant. In July 2023, he informed her of his intent to charge rent for her exclusive use of the property. This led to Mojica Rodríguez filing a lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment, possession of the property, and back rent.
The case progressed through the lower courts, culminating in a partial summary judgment in favor of Mojica Rodríguez on March 31, 2026. Reyes Fajardo opposed this ruling, arguing that there were substantial factual disputes regarding the property's ownership and her financial contributions.
The Ruling
On June 25, 2026, the Puerto Rico Court of Appeals, led by Judge Monge Gómez, issued a ruling that overturned the lower court's decision. The court found that the lower court had erred in granting a summary judgment without adequately addressing the factual disputes present in the case. The ruling stated, "The evidence presented does not support a conclusion that the property belongs exclusively to the appellant, and the ownership remains a contested issue that must be resolved in a full trial."
The court emphasized that a summary judgment is only appropriate when there are no genuine disputes regarding material facts. In this case, the court noted that there were significant questions about the ownership of the property, as both parties had contributed to its acquisition and maintenance during their marriage.
Impact
This ruling has important implications for both Mojica Rodríguez and Reyes Fajardo. It means that the case will return to the lower court for further proceedings, allowing both parties to present their evidence and arguments regarding the ownership of the property. The court's decision underscores the necessity of a thorough examination of the facts before a court can determine property ownership, particularly in cases involving marital assets.
The ruling also serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in property disputes following divorce, especially in jurisdictions like Puerto Rico where community property laws may apply. It highlights the importance of clear documentation and agreements regarding property ownership in marriage to avoid such disputes in the future.
What's Next
The case will now return to the lower court for a full trial to resolve the disputed ownership of the property. Both parties will have the opportunity to present their cases, and the court will determine the rightful owner based on the evidence provided. There is no indication in the ruling that this decision can be appealed further at this stage.