The Puerto Rico Court of Appeals issued a ruling on June 18, 2026, regarding a dispute over the admissibility of evidence in a construction defect case involving the Consejo de Titulares del Condominio Millennium and F&R Construction Corp. The court's decision impacts the ongoing legal proceedings surrounding alleged construction defects in the Millennium Condominium, affecting homeowners and developers alike.
This case, filed under docket number TA2026CE00506, arose from a complaint initiated by the Consejo de Titulares del Condominio Millennium against F&R Construction Corp. and other parties. The homeowners claimed that their condominium suffered from numerous hidden construction defects, which they attributed to the actions of the defendants. The case has been ongoing since September 2, 2010, and has seen various legal motions and responses over the years.
The central issue in this appeal was whether the court should allow the admission of a report prepared by a deceased expert witness, Engineer Gregorio Hernández. Following Hernández's death in August 2022, F&R Construction sought to introduce his report into evidence, arguing that it was essential for their defense. However, the lower court ruled against this request, stating that the report constituted hearsay and was inadmissible as evidence.
F&R Construction's argument hinged on the idea that since the court allowed the admission of a deposition taken from Hernández, it should also permit the report he authored. They contended that excluding the report while allowing the deposition created an illogical situation that undermined their ability to present a full defense. F&R argued that the report was crucial for demonstrating the alleged construction deficiencies.
In its ruling, the court upheld the lower court's decision, stating, "We do not appreciate that the resolution intervened with passion, prejudice, or manifest error that demonstrates an abuse of discretion." The court emphasized that both the report and the deposition were considered hearsay, as they were both statements made by the deceased expert that could not be cross-examined in court.
The judges on the panel included President Judge Candelaria Rosa, Judge Adames Soto, Judge Campos Pérez, and Judge Trigo Ferraiuoli. Judge Adames Soto wrote the opinion for the court.
This ruling has significant implications for the parties involved. It reinforces the standards for admissibility of expert witness reports in court, particularly when the witness is no longer available to testify. The court's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that evidence presented in court meets specific legal criteria to be deemed admissible.
Going forward, this ruling may set a precedent for similar cases involving the admissibility of expert testimony and reports in Puerto Rico. It underscores the necessity for parties to consider the implications of witness availability and the nature of evidence when preparing their cases. The decision could affect how future cases are litigated, particularly in construction defect disputes where expert testimony is often pivotal.
As for what’s next, it remains unclear if F&R Construction will seek to appeal this decision to a higher court. The court did not provide details on any related cases pending, but the ongoing nature of the construction defect claims suggests that further legal action could still occur.