The Puerto Rico Court of Appeals issued a significant ruling on July 29, 2026, regarding a contract dispute between homeowners Alina López and José Mustelier and Los Portales de Madeco Inc. The court's decision affects how similar contract disputes may be handled in the future, particularly in cases involving alleged breaches and damages.
The case began when López and Mustelier filed a lawsuit against Madeco on January 9, 2024, claiming that the company failed to fulfill its contractual obligations. They alleged that Madeco provided defective doors, frames, and hardware, which led them to hire a third party to fix the issues. The homeowners sought reimbursement for the payments made to Madeco, totaling $18,422.98, as well as additional costs for repairs and damages.
Details of the dispute reveal that López and Mustelier entered into a contract with Madeco on January 20, 2022, for the supply and installation of doors. They paid an initial amount of $12,567.37 but later encountered problems with the quality of the materials provided. Madeco responded to the lawsuit by asserting that the claims were time-barred, arguing that the homeowners did not communicate their dissatisfaction for an extended period.
The case progressed through the legal system, leading to motions for summary judgment filed by both parties on June 23, 2025. López and Mustelier argued that there were no disputed facts, and the only issue was whether Madeco had breached the contract. Madeco, on the other hand, maintained that it had fulfilled its obligations and that the lawsuit was barred by the statute of limitations.
On April 26, 2026, the lower court ruled on these motions, declaring that both parties' requests for summary judgment were denied. This decision prompted Madeco to file a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, seeking to overturn the lower court's ruling.
In its ruling, the Court of Appeals, led by Judge Lebrón Nieves and joined by Judges Pagán Ocasio, Álvarez Esnard, and Cruz Hiraldo, reversed the lower court's decision. The court stated, "We expel the certiorari request, revoke the challenged resolution, and return it to the primary forum to hold an evidentiary hearing and determine whether the cause of action is prescribed." This ruling means that the case will return to the lower court for further proceedings, allowing for the examination of evidence regarding the homeowners' claims.
The impact of this ruling is significant for both parties. For López and Mustelier, the decision provides another chance to present their case and potentially recover damages for the alleged breach of contract. For Madeco, the ruling means that it will need to prepare for a trial to defend against the claims. This case also sets a precedent for how courts may handle contract disputes involving claims of defective goods and the timeliness of such claims.
Looking ahead, the case may still be appealed further, depending on the outcomes of the evidentiary hearing in the lower court. The court's ruling opens the door for more detailed examination of the facts surrounding the contract and the alleged breaches. As the legal process continues, both parties will prepare for the next steps in this ongoing dispute.