Quinones v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico et al
Filing
10
ORDER: Denying 9 Motion for Reconsideration re 8 Order. Amended Complaint due by October 5, 2011 and to deposit $100.00 on or before October 5, 2011. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 9/27/2011. (TC)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
JESUS E. QUINONES LUIGGI,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 11-1894 (GAG)
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO,
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF PUERTO
RICO, PUERTO RICO POLICE
DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL OPERATIONS
DIVISION (POLICIA DE PUERTO RICO,
DIVISION DE OPERACIONES
ESPECIALES), AGENT JOSE NERIS
SERREANO, AGENT CHRISTIAN
ARVELO, JANE DOE, JOHN DOE,
INSURANCE COMPANIES A, B, C.
Defendants.
ORDER
On September 16, 2011 the Court sanctioned counsel Arturo Guzman in the sum of $100.00,
following its sua sponte dismissal of various claims unquestionably barred by the Eleventh
Amendment. See Order at Docket No. 8. The underlying reason for the sanction was that, “The
Plaintiff in this Section 1983 action brings constitutional claims for damages against several
individual police officers. However, he also includes as defendants the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, its Justice Department and the Police of Puerto Rico. Counsel for plaintiff ignores long
standing constitutional precedent to the effect that the Commonwealth (and its arms) are immune
from suit in federal court under the XIth Amendment.” Id.
Counsel now moves for reconsideration. See Motion at Docket No. 9. In essence, he
invokes the phrase that legendary Los Angles Lakers announcer Chick Hearn over the course of
thirty seven years (1965-2002) made famous, “NO HARM, NO FOUL.” He does not question the
Civil No. 11-1894(GAG)
2
court’s order, nor its reasoning. Id. at ¶ 3. However, he “ask[s] this Honorable Court to reconsider
the sanctions imposed, because no harm has been caused to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or
the related dependencies.” Id. at ¶ 4. He further notes that, “the summons {sic} in this case were
not produced with filing of the claim, and therefore the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, nor the
related dependencies have been informed of the standing claim in accordance with the Civil Rules
of Procedure.” Id. at ¶ 5.
The motion for reconsideration is hereby DENIED. Counsel shall deposit the sanction with
the Clerk of Court on or before October 5, 2011. While certainly there was, “no blood, no foul” to
the named Commonwealth defendants in this case, this was only the result of the undersigned’s
timely intervention, and practice of reviewing a complaint whenever it is randomly assigned to him.
Had this not occurred, the snowball would have become an avalanche. First, the Clerk of Court
would have issued summonses to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Justice
Department and Police. Plaintiff himself would then have to finance the cost of serving summonses
upon these governmental defendants. In response, these entities would have to incur in the internal
administrative processing of the summonses and complaint, followed by a referral to the
Commonwealth Justice Department for legal representation. In turn, the Federal Litigation Division
of the Puerto Rico Justice Department would have had to assign one of its attorneys to the case, who
then would have drafted and filed with the court a motion to dismiss based on Eleventh Amendment
immunity. The court would have then had to rule on said motion. Counsel further ignores the fact
that while the Commonwealth was not harmed and thus need not respond, this federal district court
indeed was “fouled.” The unnecessary and irresponsible inclusion of three defendants prompted the
court to issue its dismissal and sanction order at Docket No. 8. While the “foul” may not have been
flagrant or unsportsmanlike – given that the court ruled on the matter in minutes – the same cannot
be permitted from the larger perspective of promoting the, “just speedy and inexpensive
determination of every action and proceeding” filed in a United States District Court. See FED. R.
CIV. P. 1.
The nominal amount of the sanction imposed by the court is commesurate with both the
Civil No. 11-1894(GAG)
3
overall harm caused and avoided, but more so with the message the court must send to all counsel.
Attorney Guzman is not the first attorney sanctioned by the undersigned for including claims which
are clearly barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Finally, the court notes that the cost of the sanction
is less than the cost of serving the Commonwealth, Justice and Police Departments, as well as
attorney fees and costs that could have been imposed upon plaintiff, had the named defendants
moved to dismiss.
Finally, plaintiff is ORDERED to file an Amended Complaint on or before October 5, 2011,
in accordance with the court’s dismissal order at Docket No. 8.
SO ORDERED.
In San Juan, Puerto Rico this 27th day of September, 2011.
s/ Gustavo A. Gelpí
GUSTAVO A. GELPI
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?