Pagan-Colon v. Walgreens of San Patricio, Inc

Filing

JUDGMENT entered by Sandra L. Lynch, Chief Appellate Judge; Juan R. Torruella, Appellate Judge and Kermit V. Lipez, Appellate Judge. Affirmed. [11-1089, 11-1091]

Case: 11-1089

Document: 00116749568

Page: 1

Date Filed: 10/08/2014

Entry ID: 5858602

United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
Nos.

11-1089
11-1091
JUAN C. PAGÁN-COLÓN; ADA I. RENTA-BONILLA;
CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP PAGÁN-RENTA,
Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants,
v.
WALGREENS OF SAN PATRICIO, INC.,
Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

Before
Lynch, Chief Judge,
Torruella and Lipez, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT
Entered: October 8, 2014

On September 4, 2012, we issued an opinion in this case affirming the district court's
judgment in all respects, save its decision to grant summary judgment for defendant Walgreens
of San Patricio, Inc. on plaintiff Ada I. Renta-Bonilla's Article 1802 claim. We certified the
following questions to the Puerto Rico Supreme Court with respect to that claim:
1) When an employee's Article 1802 claim is barred because there
is a specific federal statutory employment claim, here the FMLA,
does the spouse of the employee nevertheless have a cause of
action for emotional distress damages under Article 1802 when
such relief is not available to the employee under federal law? 2)
Does the answer to this question vary depending upon the nature of
the underlying federal employment claim? If so, what are the
factors to be considered?
Pagán-Colón v. Walgreens of San Patricio, Inc., 697 F.3d 1, 19 (1st Cir. 2012). On February 14,

Case: 11-1089

Document: 00116749568

Page: 2

Date Filed: 10/08/2014

Entry ID: 5858602

2014, the Puerto Rico Supreme Court responded with the following answer to the first question:1
When a claim made by an employee under Puerto Rico Civil Code
sec. 1802 (31 L.P.R.A. § 5141) is not actionable because it is
barred by a federal statute (specifically the FMLA), neither does
the employee's spouse have a cause of action for emotional distress
damages under sec. 1802.
SLG Pagán-Renta v. Walgreens, CT-2012-16, slip op. at 9 (P.R. Feb. 14, 2014) (official
translation).
The district court held that Renta is unable to recover for emotional distress damages
under Article 1802 because her husband Juan C. Pagán-Colón cannot recover damages for
emotional distress under the FMLA. See Pagán-Colón, 697 F.3d at 16. Following the guidance
of the Puerto Rico Supreme Court, we affirm.

By the Court:
/s/ Margaret Carter, Clerk

cc: Mr. Acevedo-Cruz, Mr. Martinez-Luciano, Mr. Usera & Mr. Villavicenio-Camacho.

1

The Puerto Rico Supreme Court held that the second question was not certifiable because
it was "speculative." Walgreens, CT-2012-16, slip op. at 1 n.1 (official translation).