The Court of Appeals of Puerto Rico has upheld a lower court's ruling that requires Diego Jacobson Perry to pay Mario Ezequiel Farrando Ciriano a total of $308,073.56, plus an additional $5,000 for legal fees. This decision, issued on June 26, 2026, stems from a dispute over a loan agreement and construction work that went awry.
This ruling is significant as it clarifies the enforceability of loan agreements and the obligations of parties in construction contracts. It emphasizes the importance of written agreements and the consequences of failing to adhere to their terms.
Background
The case began when Mario Ezequiel Farrando Ciriano filed a lawsuit against Diego Jacobson Perry on November 12, 2020. Farrando claimed that Perry owed him $257,589 under a loan agreement signed on April 21, 2017. The agreement stipulated that if Perry did not repay the loan by November 1, 2017, he would incur interest at a rate of 6% until the debt was settled.
Perry responded to the lawsuit by denying the allegations and filing a counterclaim. He argued that Farrando had performed poorly on construction projects he had contracted him for, leading to additional expenses exceeding $100,000. Perry claimed that their financial relationship was informal and based on trust, which complicated the matter further.
The case was heard in the Superior Court of Humacao, where the judge ruled in favor of Farrando on March 25, 2025. The court found that Perry had indeed failed to repay the loan and ordered him to pay the owed amount along with legal fees for what it deemed a frivolous defense.
The Ruling
The Court of Appeals, led by Judge Barresi Ramos, reviewed the case and upheld the lower court's decision. The judges concluded that there was no genuine dispute regarding the existence of the debt. They noted, "The evidence presented clearly shows that the defendant recognized his debt multiple times and agreed to the terms of repayment."
The court emphasized the validity of the loan agreement, stating that it met all legal requirements for enforceability. They highlighted that Perry had acknowledged the debt in various communications, including emails, and had previously agreed to sign a promissory note.
In its ruling, the court also addressed Perry's claims regarding the quality of Farrando's work, stating that these issues did not negate the validity of the loan agreement. The judges concluded that the debt was clear, overdue, and enforceable, thus affirming the lower court's order for Perry to pay Farrando the total amount of $308,073.56.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for both parties involved and for similar cases in Puerto Rico. It reinforces the importance of written contracts and the legal obligations that arise from them. The decision serves as a reminder that informal agreements or personal relationships do not exempt individuals from fulfilling contractual obligations.
The court's ruling may also influence future cases involving disputes over construction contracts and loans, as it sets a precedent for how such matters are adjudicated. It underscores the necessity for clear documentation and adherence to the terms of agreements to avoid legal complications.