31 P.R. Laws Ann. § 5141

Section 5141 requires a negligence plaintiff to prove duty, breach, damage, and a causal connection between the damage and the tortious conduct.

Baum-Holland v. Hilton El Con Management, LLC · filed 2020-06-30§ 5141

To recover on a negligence-based tort claim pursuant to Article 1802, a plaintiff must establish: "(1) a duty requiring the defendant to conform to a certain standard of conduct, (2) a breach of that duty, (3) proof of damage,[20] and (4) a causal connection between the damage and the tortious conduct."

Section 5141 makes injury through fault the essential basis of Article 1802 liability, rather than possession of another’s property.

Federal Insurance Company I.C. And Aetna Insurance Company v. De Ponce · filed 1984-12-20§ 5141

The fault can consist of either an intentional or a negligent act; the code provision does not distinguish clearly between them.

Section 5141 permits a personal-injury action to survive the defendant’s death and be brought against the tortfeasor’s heirs.

Ferrer Encarnación v. Y Lebron · filed 1994-06-03§ 5141

actions for personal injury under P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 (1991) also survive the death of a defendant and may be brought originally against the tortfeasor’s heirs.

Section 5141’s negligence framework requires a legally cognizable duty and supports liability only when an omitted action would have prevented a reasonably foreseeable injury.

Woods-Leber v. Hyatt Hotels of Puerto Rico, Inc. · filed 1996-12-31§ 5141

For purposes of Article 1802, there is a causal relationship between an omission and an injury when the injury was reasonably foreseeable and could have been avoided had the defendant performed the omitted act.

Article 1057 can inform the operation of Article 1802 when determining negligence liability.

Coyne v. Taber Partners I, D/B/A Ambassador Plaza Hotel & Casino · filed 1995-05-23§ 5141

We agree with plaintiff that, here, article 1057 informs the operation of article 1802.

Comparative negligence reduces an award in proportion to the plaintiff’s share of the harm rather than automatically barring recovery.

Troche v. Pepsi Cola of Puerto Rico Bottling Co. · filed 1997-11-26§ 5141

Under comparative negligence principles if plaintiff’s own conduct is one of the adequate causes of his harm, then his award shall be reduced in proportion to the percentage of the harm he caused himself.

The court adopted the more recent Cotto line as the better current interpretation of § 5141 in a premises-liability notice dispute.

Cintron v. United States · filed 1998-01-13§ 5141

the Court finds that the latter more accurately reflects the current state of Puerto Rican law.

Section 5141 requires proof that a defendant’s negligent act or omission caused damage, and the court held that the complaint pleaded enough facts for the negligence claim to proceed.

Santiago v. Reliable Financial Services, Inc. · filed 2007-12-11

Under Article 1802 of Puerto Rico’s Civil Code, recovery of tort damages requires a showing that the defendant ‘by act or omission cause[d] damage to another through fault or negligence.’

Article 1802 allows a negligence claim against an employer to proceed when there is a factual dispute over whether the employer negligently investigated a workplace complaint, even if the underlying complaint was not actionable.

Rivera v. DHL Global Forwarding · filed 2008-02-25

Whether or not it was determined at the conclusion of the investigation that Rivera brought an actionable claim does not relieve DHL from its duty to properly investigate.

Article 1802 does not support Lupu’s fraudulent-inducement negligence claim because the undisputed facts showed no false statement or sham probationary job.

Lupu v. Wyndham El Conquistador Resort & Golden Door Spa · filed 2008-04-30

On the undisputed facts, Lupu cannot make out a factually supportable claim, and we need not address the hypothetical outer reaches of the statute.

Article 1802 does not allow an additional damages claim for conduct already covered by Puerto Rico’s special employment statutes unless the alleged tortious conduct is distinct from that covered conduct.

Medina v. Adecco · filed 2008-06-12

Accordingly, the court must dismiss Medina’s Article 1802 claim.

Section 5141 requires a negligence plaintiff to prove a defendant's duty, breach, and causation of harm.

Cline v. Puerto Rico Ports Authority · filed 2008-10-22

To prevail on a negligence claim under Article 1802, a plaintiff must show that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff, that the defendant breached that duty, and that the breach caused the plaintiff harm.

Section 5141 does not impose dram-shop liability on a business host that is not a public commercial establishment engaged in selling alcoholic beverages.

Vernet v. Serrano-Torres · filed 2009-05-21

In sum, we hold that under Article 1802 and the Puerto Rico Supreme Court's holding in López, ICN is not liable on plaintiffs' claims because it is not a public commercial establishment engaged in the sale of alcoholic beverages.

Article 1802 imposes tort liability when a defendant's negligent act or omission causes injury, and the court applied that rule to a municipality's duty to maintain roads and traffic signs.

MORALES v. Municipality of San Juan · filed 2008-08-13

Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141, permits the recovery of tort damages upon a showing that a defendant “by act or omission cause[d] damage to another through fault or negligence.”

Section 5141 imposes tort liability when a person or entity causes damage through a negligent or intentional act or omission, and a plaintiff must prove injury, breach, and causation.

Ocasio v. HOGAR GEOBEL INC. · filed 2008-09-25§ 5141

It imposes liability on any person or entity who by an act or omission causes damages to another through fault or negligence.

The court held that § 5141 governs physician-malpractice liability and that a plaintiff must prove duty, breach, and causation; factual disputes on hospital negligence and causation therefore precluded summary judgment.

Vargas-Colon v. Hospital Damas, Inc. · filed 2009-02-12

In order to prevail in a medical malpractice claim, a plaintiff “must establish (1) the duty owed, (2) an act or omission transgressing that duty, and (3) a sufficient causal nexus between the breach and the harm.”

Article 1802 permits a relative to recover for emotional harm caused by tortious injury to a loved one when the plaintiff proves emotional harm, causation, and wrongful conduct, and the claim is derivative of the loved one's viable claim.

Mendez-Matos v. Municipality of Guaynabo · filed 2009-02-24

To prevail on such a theory, a plaintiff must prove (1) that he has suffered emotional harm, (2) that this harm was caused by the tortious conduct of the defendant toward the plaintiff's relative or loved one, and (3) that the defendant's conduct was tortious or wrongful.

Section 5141 makes a person or entity liable when its negligent act or omission causes damage to another.

Albertorio-Santiago v. Reliable Financial Services · filed 2009-05-04

Article 1802 of the Civil Code of Puerto Rico imposes liability on any person or entity who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence.

Section 5141 imposes liability on a person or entity whose negligent act or omission causes damage to another, including when the actor fails to exercise due diligence to prevent foreseeable injury.

Gonzalez-Perez v. Davila · filed 2009-06-08

“Article 1802 of Puerto Rico’s Civil Code imposes liability on any person or entity who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence.”

Section 5141 imposes liability for damages caused by a negligent act or omission, and a plaintiff must prove injury, breach of duty, and a sufficient causal connection.

Wojciechowicz v. United States · filed 2009-09-09

Negligence law in Puerto Rico is governed by the Civil Code, which imposes liability for an "act or omission" that causes damages to another through fault or negligence.

Article 1802 requires a plaintiff to prove duty, breach, damage, and a causal connection between the tortious conduct and the damage.

Candelario Del Moral v. UBS Financial Services Inc. · filed 2010-01-13

In order to prevail in an Article 1802 claim, the plaintiff must establish “(1) a duty requiring the defendant to conform to a certain standard of conduct, (2) a breach of that duty, (3) proof of damage, and (4) a causal connection between the damage and the tortious conduct.”

Section 5141 imposes tort liability for damages caused by a person's fault or negligence, and the court applied that provision to the relatives' derivative claims.

Maldonado v. De Ahorro · filed 2010-02-09

Article 1802 of Puerto Rico’s Civil Code imposes liability upon a person for an “act or omission” that “causes damages to another through fault or negligence.”

The court held that the Article 1802 mental-anguish claim was time-barred and dismissed it with prejudice.

Bianchi-Montana v. Crucci-Silva · filed 2010-06-30

Mental anguish is a tort claim which, under Puerto Rico law, has a prescriptive period of one year from the time plaintiff “knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis for his claim.”

The court treated § 5141 as imposing liability for negligent acts or omissions causing damage and applied it to a negligent-hiring claim, finding that a jury could decide whether Martinez breached a duty and caused the injury.

Sanchez v. SEGUROS TRIPLE S, INC. · filed 2010-02-22

Under Puerto Rico law a “person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.” P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 (2009).

The court applied Article 1802 to uphold the jury's finding that the officers' negligence caused Carmen Burgos-Yantin compensable damages.

Burgos-Yantín v. Municipality of Juana Díaz · filed 2010-11-18Article 1802

Therefore there was no manifest error of law in the determination of the jury under Puerto Rico tort law that the negligent conduct of officers Miguel Torres-Santiago and Gary Conde-González caused Carmen Burgos-Yantin to suffer damages.

The court states the elements of an Article 1802 claim and rules on the summary-judgment motion.

Moreno-Perez v. Toledo-Davila · filed 2011-03-04Article 1802

Therefore, the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the plaintiffs Article 1802 claim is DENIED as to them.

The court applies Article 1802 to the plaintiff's defamation claim and identifies the elements required for a private defamation action.

Baltodano v. Merck, Sharp & Dohme (I.A.) Corp. · filed 2011-03-03

Thus, a private plaintiff asserting a defamation claim against a private defendant must show that the defendant (1) made a false statement, (2) in a negligent manner, (3) causing actual damage to the plaintiff.

The court applied Article 1802 to the negligence claim and held that material factual disputes precluded summary judgment.

Rodriguez Ex Rel. Rodriguez v. Rico · filed 2011-04-27Article 1802

The presence of material issues of fact precludes the court from ruling that Plaintiff has summarily failed to state a claim under § 1802.

The court states the elements required to recover damages under Article 1802 and cites § 5141.

Ramirez v. Hospital Espanol Auxilio Mutuo, Inc. · filed 2011-05-03

Pursuant to article 1802 of the Civil Code, in order to recover for damages a plaintiff has to establish: (1) that a harm was actually done; (2) that there is a causal nexus between the harm and the act or omission of another person; and (3) that the act or omission arises out of fault or negligence.

The court directly applies Article 1802 to evaluate Plaintiffs’ negligence claim and its prima facie elements.

Echevarria v. Robinson Helicopter Co. · filed 2011-08-25

Article 1802 provides for a cause of action stemming from an individual’s negligent acts.

The court directly applied Article 1802's causation requirement and granted summary judgment on the claim.

Ramirez-Lluveras v. Pagan-Cruz · filed 2011-12-22

Therefore, the supervisory defendants did not cause Caceres’ injuries within the meaning of article 1802.

The court applied Article 1802's negligence elements and upheld the jury's finding.

Serrano-Munoz v. De Auxillo · filed 2012-01-26§ 5141

This comprised a sufficient basis for the jury's Article 1802 finding.

The court states the governing Article 1802 liability rule and its three required elements in analyzing the FTCA negligence claim.

Sanchez Ex Rel. DR-S. v. United States · filed 2012-02-14§ 5141

Liability turns on three basic elements: (1) evidence of physical or emotional injury, (2) a negligent or intentional act or omission (the breach of duty element), and (3) a causal nexus between the injury and the defendant's act or omission (i.e., proximate cause).

The court applied Article 1802 to dismiss the tort claims.

Reyes-Orta v. Highway & Transportation Authority · filed 2012-02-14Article 1802

The motion to dismiss Reyes-Orta’s Articles 1802 and 1803 claims against Codefendants is therefore GRANTED.

The court states the elements required to prevail under Article 1802 and applies the statute to dismiss claims against the House and Commonwealth while allowing individual-capacity claims to survive summary judgment.

Torres v. House of Representatives · filed 2012-04-16Article 1802 / § 5141

Thus, to prevail in an action under Article 1802, Plaintiff must show: (1) that defendants acted negligently; (2) that she suffered damages; and (3) a causal link or connection between the actions/negligence and said damages.

The court applied Article 1802 to determine when the tort claim could survive alongside specific labor-law claims.

Rios v. Municipality of Guaynabo · filed 2013-04-12Article 1802

Montalvo’s Articles 1802 and 1803 claims can only survive if the complaint properly alleges that the defendants engaged in tortious conduct independent from the alleged sexual harassment and retaliation.

The court applied Article 1802 and evaluated the claim's elements.

Diaz Aviation Corporation v. Airport Aviation · filed 2013-06-14Article 1802 / § 5141

The elements of an Article 1802 claim are a physical or emotional injury, a negligent or intentional act or omission (i.e., a wrongful act), and a causal connection between the injury and the defendant's wrongful conduct.

The court states the governing elements and applies them to affirm dismissal of the claim.

Díaz Aviation Corp. v. Airport Aviation Services, Inc. · filed 2013-06-14Article 1802

As described earlier, Diaz Aviation could not prove that AAS conspired with PRPA to induce PRPA to take these actions.

The court applies Article 1802 to the facts and grants summary judgment on liability.

Ramirez-Lluveras v. Pagan-Cruz · filed 2012-04-23Article 1802

Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment as to Pagan’s liability under article 1802 is GRANTED.

The court applied Article 1802 in denying Rule 50 relief, finding sufficient evidence for liability.

Ramirez-Lluveras v. Pagan-Cruz · filed 2013-01-28Article 1802

The Court finds that a legally sufficient evidentiary basis existed for a reasonable jury to find defendant Sustache liable under both section 1983 and article 1802.

The court directly applied Article 1802 and dismissed the claim as superseded by specific labor statutes.

Font-Llacer-De-Pueyo v. Federal Deposit Insurance · filed 2013-03-25Article 1802

Accordingly, the court hereby DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiffs claim under Article 1802.

The court applies Article 1802's one-year limitations rule and finds the claim time-barred.

Bryan v. Wal-Mart Puerto Rico, Inc. · filed 2013-06-26

Therefore, we hereby find that the one-year statute of limitations began to run anew on December 22, 2009 and had to be tolled prior to December 22, 2010 for the Plaintiffs claim to not be time-barred.

The court interprets and applies Article 1802's negligence elements to the premises-liability claim.

Nieves-Romero v. United States · filed 2013-05-03Article 1802

A plaintiff suing for negligence under Article 1802 must establish four things: a duty requiring the defendant to conform to a certain standard of care, a breach of that duty, proof of damage, and a causal connection between the negligence and the damage.

The court expressly states the governing Article 1802 tort rule and applies Puerto Rico tort-law damages principles to limit the plaintiff's lost-future-earnings recovery.

Ortiz-Lebron v. United States · filed 2013-05-20Article 1802

Under Article 1802 of the Civil Code, tort actions arise when there has been a violation of a right or an omission of a duty required by law; the person who, through fault or negligence, causes damage to another shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.

The court applied Article 1802's negligence-liability elements to the premises-liability claim.

Calderon-Ortega v. United States · filed 2014-05-16Article 1802 / § 5141

Under Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, [a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence may be held liable for the damage.

The court interpreted Article 1802 and applied that interpretation to dismiss the plaintiff's Article 1802 claim.

Miranda v. Deloitte LLP · filed 2013-11-05Article 1802 / § 5141

Article 1802 is Puerto Rico’s general tort statute; it provides that a person who “causes damages to another through fault or negligence” shall be liable in damages.

The court applied Article 1802's rule concerning supplementary liability and dismissed the claim with prejudice.

Irizarry-Santiago v. Essilor Industries · filed 2013-11-13§ 5141

Plaintiff seeks damages pursuant to article 1802, Puerto Rico’s general tort statute providing that a person who “causes damages to another through fault or negligence” shall be liable in damages.

The court applies Article 1802 to dismiss the claim with prejudice.

Morales v. Venegas Construction Corp. · filed 2015-04-30Article 1802

Thus, plaintiffs Article 1802 claim is dismissed with prejudice.

The court directly applied Article 1802 to dismiss the plaintiff's general tort claim.

Miranda v. Deloitte LLP · filed 2013-11-05Article 1802/§ 5141

Article 1802 is Puerto Rico’s general tort statute; it provides that a person who “causes damages to another through fault or negligence” shall be liable in damages.

The court applied Article 1802 to dismiss the plaintiff's claim, holding that special labor legislation barred additional compensation under Article 1802.

Irizarry-Santiago v. Essilor Industries · filed 2013-11-13

The Puerto Rico Supreme Court has explicitly addressed the interplay between causes of action arising under article 1802 and special employment statutes.

The court directly applied Article 1802 and dismissed the claim with prejudice because it was based on the same allegations as the Law 100 age-discrimination claim.

Morales v. Venegas Construction Corp. · filed 2015-04-30Article 1802

Thus, plaintiffs Article 1802 claim is dismissed with prejudice.

The court applied Article 1802 to evaluate and dismiss Diana Rishell’s tort claim.

Rishell v. Medical Card System, Inc. · filed 2013-11-14Article 1802 / § 5141

Plaintiff Diana Rishell’s claim pursuant to article 1802 must fail, and is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

The court states the elements of an Article 1802 claim and applies them to dismiss the tort claims.

Rishell v. Medical Card System, Inc. · filed 2013-11-14Article 1802

Without a plausible allegation of a breach of contract, therefore, there can be no valid allegation of tortious conduct.

The court applies Article 1802 to bar duplicative tort damages for conduct covered by specific labor statutes.

Santana-Colón v. Houghton Mifflin Harcout Publishing Co. · filed 2014-09-30

If they seek damages for Santana under the general tort statute for conduct covered by the FMLA, Law 115 or Law 80, they cannot prevail.

The court applied Article 1802's remedial exclusivity principle and dismissed the tort claims.

Santana-Colón v. Houghton Mifflin Harcout Publishing Co. · filed 2014-09-30Article 1802

If they seek damages for Santana under the general tort statute for conduct covered by the FMLA, Law 115 or Law 80, they cannot prevail.

The court states the governing elements of negligence liability under Article 1802 and applies them to the premises-liability claim.

Marquez v. Casa de Espana de Puerto Rico · filed 2014-11-13Article 1802 / § 5141

To establish liability for negligence, a plaintiff must show that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff, that the defendant breached that duty (i.e., that the defendant was negligent), that the plaintiff suffered damages, and that those damages were caused by the breach of duty (i.e., proximate causation).

The court expressly interprets and applies Article 1802’s tort-claim elements and comparative-negligence framework in resolving the summary-judgment motion.

Lopez v. Universal Insurance · filed 2015-03-13

Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code establishes the elements for a general torts claim.

The court applied Article 1802’s one-year prescription rule to dismiss the plaintiff’s negligence claims as time-barred.

Rivera-Torres v. Castillo · filed 2015-06-16Article 1802

The one-year prescription on article 1802 fault or negligence claims starts running “from the time the aggrieved person had knowledge” of her injury.

The court applies Article 1802 to analyze Plaintiff's negligence and premises-liability claim.

Marquez v. Casa de Espana de Puerto Rico · filed 2014-11-13

To establish liability for negligence, a plaintiff must show that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff, that the defendant breached that duty (i.e., that the defendant was negligent), that the plaintiff suffered damages, and that those damages were caused by the breach of duty (i.e., proximate causation).

The court directly interprets and applies Article 1802 and § 5141 in analyzing the elements of the tort claim and comparative negligence.

Lopez v. Universal Insurance · filed 2015-03-13

Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code establishes the elements for a general torts claim.

The court applied Article 1802/§ 5141 to the plaintiff's negligence claims and held them time-barred under Puerto Rico's one-year prescription period.

Rivera-Torres v. Castillo · filed 2015-06-16Article 1802

The one-year prescription on article 1802 fault or negligence claims starts running “from the time the aggrieved person had knowledge” of her injury.

The court applied the Puerto Rico medical-malpractice elements and concluded the jury found the causation element lacking.

Rosa-Rivera v. Dorado Health, Inc. · filed 2015-05-29§ 5141

The jury simply found the third component lacking.

The court applied the Puerto Rico medical-malpractice elements to the verdict.

Rosa-Rivera v. Dorado Health, Inc. · filed 2015-05-29§ 5141

The jury simply found the third component lacking.

The court applies Article 1802 negligence principles to assess the plaintiffs’ claims and the summary-judgment issues.

Situ v. O'Neill · filed 2015-08-25Article 1802

Generally, Puerto Rico law defines negligence as the failure to exercise due diligence to avoid foreseeable risks.

The court expressly interpreted Article 1802 and applied its negligence elements and premises-liability principles to decide the summary-judgment motions.

Situ v. O'Neill · filed 2015-08-25Article 1802

A commercial establishment is thus liable for the damages suffered by its clients or guests due to hazardous conditions that were known or should have been known by the owner or operator of the commercial establishment.

Section 5141 imposes tort liability for damage caused to another by an act or omission through fault or negligence.

Vargas-Colón v. Fundación Damas, Inc. · filed 2016-01-19

Under Puerto Rico’s general tort statute, a person is liable in tort when “by an act or omission [they] cause damage to another through fault or negligence.” P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141. “As a general rule, a person is only liable for his own acts or omissions and only by exception is a person liable for the acts or omissions of others.”

Section 5141 negligence claims require injury, breach of duty, and proximate causation.

Horowitz v. Luxury Hotels Int'l of P.R., Inc. · filed 2018-08-02

To prevail on a negligence claim, plaintiffs must establish three elements: (1) an injury, (2) a breach of duty, and (3) proximate causation of the injury.

Section 5141 negligence claims require injury, breach of duty, and proximate causation.

Velázquez-Vélez v. Molina-Rodríguez · filed 2018-08-29

To prevail on a Puerto Rico negligence claim, plaintiffs must establish three elements: (1) an injury, (2) a breach of duty, and (3) proximate causation of the injury.

Section 5141 imposes tort liability for damage caused by an act or omission through fault or negligence, and a negligence claim requires duty, breach, injury, and proximate causation.

Cedeño Nieves v. Aerostar Airport Holdings LLC · filed 2017-04-26

Plaintiff brings suit under Article 1802, which imposes tort liability on any person who, by act or omission, causes damage to another through fault' or negligence. P.R. Laws Ann.- tit. 31, § 5141. To establish negligence, a plaintiff must show: (1) defendant owed a duty to plaintiff; (2) defendant breached that duty (i.e. defendant was negligent); (3) plaintiff suffered injury; and (4) a sufficient causal nexus between defendant’s breach of the duty of care and plaintiffs injury (i.e. proximate causation).

Section 5141 imposes tort liability when a person's act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence, requiring proof of a dangerous condition, the defendant's actual or constructive knowledge, and a causal link to the injury.

Outter v. Marriott PR Management Corporation · filed 2020-03-18

Article 1802 imposes tort liability on “[a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence.” P.R. Laws. Ann. tit 31, §5141. ... When evaluated against these standards, the Court is of the view that summary judgment as to Plaintiff’s Article 1802 claim is proper. ... Given that Plaintiff has failed to present evidence evincing a link between Defendants’ acts or omissions to his injuries, Plaintiff’s claims under Article 1802 cannot survive summary judgment.

Section 5141 provides a cause of action for tortious interference with the contractual obligations of third parties.

Philips Medical Systems Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Alpha Biomedical and Diagnostic Corp. · filed 2020-11-30§ 5141

“The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico has recognized that under article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, 31 P.R. Laws Ann. § 5141, a cause of action exists for tortious interference with the contractual obligations of third parties.”

Section 5141 requires a plaintiff alleging fault or negligence to establish duty, breach, resulting damages, and a causal connection.

American Board of Internal Medicine v. Salas-Rushford, M.D. · filed 2021-07-09§ 5141

Specifically, the following must be established: (1) that a duty was owed by a defendant to the plaintiff; (2) that said duty was breached; (3) that damages materialized19; and (4) that there exists a causal nexus between the damages and the breach.

Section 5141 imposes general tort liability for damages caused by fault or negligence, requiring injury, a negligent or intentional act or omission involving a breached duty, and a sufficient causal nexus.

DeMario v. Lamadrid-Maldonado · filed 2023-01-18

Article 1802 of the Civil Code is Puerto Rico’s general tort statute. It states that a person who “causes damages to another through fault or negligence” shall be liable in damages. P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141. “The three essential elements for general tort claims are: (1) evidence of physical or emotional injury, (2) a negligent or intentional act or omission (the breach of duty element), and (3) a sufficient causal nexus between the injury and defendant's act or omission (in other words, proximate cause).” ... Omissions generate liability under Article 1802 “when the law imposes a duty of care requiring the defendant to conform to a certain standard of conduct for the protection of others against unreasonable risk.” ... Plaintiffs have not been able to establish their Article 1802 claim against the Municipality for failing to maintain and energize the area of the accident in the absence of a duty to do so. Therefore, Plaintiffs claims against the Municipality of Hormigueros are DISMISSED.

A claim under § 5141 does not require a contractual relationship, but allegations tied solely to duties owed to another entity and injury to that entity are derivative rather than a direct beneficiary claim.

UBS Financial Services Inc. v. Estate of Pedro Jose Nazario Serrano · filed 2024-05-21

Second, and similarly, the ERS Beneficiaries sought to hold UBS liable under Article 1802, the Commonwealth's general tort statute, claiming that UBS engaged in "grossly negligent and illicit conduct . . . while providing the services [it was] required to render to [ERS] and the breach by [UBS] of [its] contractual, non-contractual[,] and fiduciary duties to [ERS]." ... While the ERS Beneficiaries are correct that tort claims do not require a "contractual relationship" between the parties, the only underlying duty alleged in the FAC is the duty that UBS owed to ERS. ... At bottom, there is no way to read the FAC as raising any claims of direct injury to the ERS Beneficiaries.

Section 5141 imposes liability for damage caused by a person's fault or negligence and requires proof of damage, causation, and negligent or wrongful conduct.

Andino-Oquendo v. Federal National Mortgage Association · filed 2023-02-27

Article 1802 provides that “[a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.” ... “A plaintiff must prove three elements to support a claim for damages under Article 1802: ‘first, proof of the reality of the damage suffered; second, a causal relation between the damage and the action or omission of another person; and third, said act or omission is negligent or wrongful.’” ... Therefore, Plaintiff has failed to establish “a causal relation between the damage and the action or omission of” Defendant, which is one of the elements for a successful claim for damages under Article 1802.

Section 5141 imposes liability on a person or entity whose act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence.

Dillon v. Maldonado · filed 2023-07-28

Accordingly, the Court finds Defendant liable under 31 L.P.R.A. § 5141, which “imposes liability on any person or entity who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence.” Franco v. Selective Ins. Co., 184 F.3d 4, 9 n. 3 (1st Cir. 1999). Consequently, the Court ADJUDGES and DECREES that Defendant acted negligently, and such negligent actions were the cause of Plaintiffs’ damages.

Section 5141 requires an act or omission causing damage through fault or negligence, and a decedent’s voluntary suicide may break the causal link to a third party’s alleged negligence.

Orsini v. Doctors Center Hospital Inc. · filed 2024-09-05

Article 1802 provides that “[a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.” ... Thus, the distinction the Caraballo Court made was that in a normal Article 1802 case, the deceased’s pain and suffering is personal and can be inherited, except when the death occurs by suicide. ... In a case of self-inflicted harm, under both scenarios no negligence exists that can be attributed to a third party, so there is no causal link that ties any third party to the resulting death. Oquendo, 2019 WL 13094748, at *14; P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 (1930) (imposing liability upon a person who by an act or omission causes damage to another) (emphasis added).

Section 5141 imposes an obligation to repair damage caused to another by an act or omission through fault or negligence.

Sandoval v. Hospital Oriente, Inc. · filed 2025-03-14

Medical malpractice liability in Puerto Rico is fault based. ... Pursuant to Article 1802, “a person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage done.” P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141.

Section 5141 permits recovery of damages when a defendant causes damage to another through fault or negligence; a negligence claim requires injury, a duty and breach, and proximate cause.

Garcia-Rivera · filed 2025-12-01

As is well known, Article 1802 of the Civil Code of 1930⁵ only permits recovery of damages upon a showing that a defendant “cause[d] damage to another through fault or negligence.” P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141. For a negligence claim to prosper, Puerto Rico law requires Plaintiff to establish (1) evidence of physical or emotional injury; (2) a duty and negligent or intentional act or omission (a breach of duty); and (3) a sufficient causal nexus between the injury and defendant’s act or omission (or proximate cause).

Section 5141 imposes liability for damage caused to another by an act or omission through fault or negligence and serves as the general Civil Code basis for malicious-prosecution claims.

Schroeder v. De Bertolo · filed 1996-01-18

There is no specific provision creating a cause of action for malicious prosecution in the Puerto Rico Civil Code. Article 1802, however, provides that a “person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.” P.R.Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141. Just as in common law jurisdictions, there are four elements to malicious prosecution under Puerto Rico law: i) malicious institution or instigation of criminal proceedings against the claimant; ii) without probable cause; iii) which ended favorably for the claimant; and iv) whereby the claimant suffered damages.

Section 5141 provides a tort claim for damages when a person's harm is caused by acts or omissions through fault or negligence.

Romero v. Caribbean Restaurants, Inc. · filed 1998-07-31

The general tort claim of plaintiff and his spouse under Puerto Rico Civil Code section 1802 is derivative of his claims under the other statutes, It calls for damages because the acts or omissions of CBI through fault or negligence caused harm to Landrau. Because none of plaintiffs causes of action under federal and local statutes were sustained, his claim for damages under this statute necessarily fails as well.

Section 5141 imposes tort liability for damages caused by negligence or fault, requiring a negligent act or omission, damages, and a causal relationship between them.

Ponce v. Ashford Presbyterian Community Hospital · filed 1999-08-25

In this jurisdiction, tort liability is governed by Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R.Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 (1990), which imposes responsibility for damages caused by negligence or fault. The necessary elements to prevail in a tort action are: (1) a negligent act or omission, (2) damages and (3) a causal relationship between them.

Section 5141 permits a wife to recover for mental and moral anguish caused by injury to her husband.

Ganapolsky v. Park Gardens Development Corp. · filed 1971-03-08

It is well established that under Puerto Rican law a wife is entitled to recover for the “mental and moral anguish” she has suffered as a result of an injury to her husband.

Article 1802 does not create a separate negligence claim when the alleged damages arise exclusively from breach of contract rather than an independent duty.

Domenech v. Dymax Corp. · filed 1996-12-22

If a plaintiffs damages arise exclusively from a defendant’s alleged breach of contract, the plaintiff does not have a separate cause of action for negligence.

Section 5141 imposes liability for harm caused by negligent acts or omissions.

Lynne Woods-Leber and Anthony Leber v. Hyatt Hotels of Puerto Rico, Inc., Etc. · filed 1997-11-26

Article 1802 of the Civil Code, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141, imposes liability on any person or entity which, by his, her, or its negligent acts or omissions, causes harm or damage.

Section 5141 was treated as the likely source of a duty to negotiate in good faith, but preliminary dealings do not trigger that duty.

Euromotion, Inc. D/B/A Prime Wholesalers v. Bmw of North America, Inc. · filed 1998-02-24

None of the above, in our view, were negotiations such as might trigger the duty of good faith in the Puerto Rican Civil Code.

Section 5141 permits liability for a party’s own negligence even if another party was also responsible for the dangerous condition.

Jimenez-Ruiz v. Spirit Airlines, Inc. · filed 2011-06-16

Even if WASCO and PRPA were responsible for the conditions of the mobile ramp, Spirit can still be responsible for its own acts or omissions. Spirit would still be obligated to pay damages if it were determined that it was negligent or breached its duty of care to Plaintiff, regardless of WASCO and PRPA’s liability.

Section 5141 imposes liability for injury caused by fault or negligence, but reasonable law enforcement mistakes do not give rise to tort liability where the officers would be protected by qualified immunity.

Solis-Alarcon v. United States · filed 2011-11-23

Puerto Rico imposes liability for fault or negligence that causes injury, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 (2010), but protecting law enforcement agents for reasonable mistakes is common, Unus, 565 F.3d at 117; Villafranca v. United States, 587 F.3d 257, 261 (5th Cir. 2009), and in at least two decisions, this court assumed that Puerto Rico tort law would not impose personal liability for mistaken arrests where the officers would be protected in Bivens claims by qualified immunity.

Section 5141 does not provide a general tort claim for harm caused by the negligent or malicious filing of frivolous or harassing litigation.

Asphaltos Trade, S.A v. Bituven Puerto Rico, LLC · filed 2021-08-19

Because there is no cause of action under general tort for negligent or malicious filing of frivolous or harassing litigation, Bonilla, 913 F. Supp. at 659, Diaz’s general tort claim fails.

Section 5141 did not make the landlord liable for failing to install fire protection, hire a guard, or further restrict a tenant’s storage activities on these facts.

Fireman's Fund American Insurance v. Almacenes Miramar, Inc. · filed 1981-05-13

We have already determined that on the present facts Crédito cannot be held liable for not installing a sprinkler system, providing fire or smoke alarms, hiring a watchman, or restricting Richardson-Merrell’s activities further than it had already tried to do in drafting its lease and inspecting the premises.

Article 1802 does not provide a general remedy for discrimination claims that are specifically redressed by Act 62.

Barreto v. ITT World Directories, Inc. · filed 1999-07-30§ 5141

Inasmuch as the claims asserted in the complaint arise from the alleged discrimination against HERNANDEZ by reason of his military status, it is axiomatic that it is Act 62 and not Article 1802 that applies to the facts in this action. Therefore, HERNANDEZ cannot claim remedies under Article 1802 or under any other general statute for actions or facts intended to be redressed by Act 62.

The court held that Article 1802 does not provide a remedy for negligently receiving, accepting, or accrediting fraudulently endorsed checks because the specialized negotiable-instruments statute supplies the exclusive remedy.

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Perez · filed 2001-01-04

Section 24 provides the exclusive remedy for this conduct.

Article 1802 does not permit a duplicative claim for conduct covered by a specific Puerto Rico labor statute; a separate Article 1802 claim requires distinct tortious or negligent conduct.

Reyes-Ortiz v. Valdes · filed 2010-03-22

[T]o the extent that a specific labor law covers the conduct for which a plaintiff seeks damages, he is barred from using that same conduct to also bring a claim under Article 1802. An additional claim under Article 1802 may only be brought by the employee-plaintiff if it is based on tortious or negligent conduct distinct from that covered by the specific labor law(s) invoked.

The court directly applied Article 1802 to determine that the relatives' tort claims were not independent because they rested on the same alleged discriminatory acts and lacked distinct tortious conduct.

Rivera-Cartagena v. Wal-Mart Puerto Rico, Inc. · filed 2011-03-04Article 1802

Velez’s and the conjugal partnership’s claims are not independent of Rivera’s claims because they are based on the same alleged discriminatory acts.

The court applied Article 1802/§ 5141 to the tortious-interference claim and held that the complaint failed to state such a claim.

Alpha Biomedical & Diagnostic Corp. v. Philips Medical Systems Netherland BV · filed 2011-11-21

A plaintiff alleging tortious interference with contract under Puerto Rican law, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141, must show: (1) that a contract exists, (2) that the defendant interfered with that contract, (3) fault on the part of the defendant, (4) damage to the plaintiff, and (5) a nexus between the defendant’s fault and the plaintiffs damage.

The court applied Article 1802/§ 5141 to evaluate and dismiss Diana Rishell’s tort claim.

Rishell v. Medical Card System, Inc. · filed 2013-02-28Article 1802 / § 5141

Plaintiff Diana Rishell’s claim under section 1802 must also fail because without an allegation of a breach of contract, there is no valid allegation of tortious conduct.

Article 1802 moral rights claims concerning site-specific art are not preempted by VARA because VARA does not protect that art.

The Estate of Jose Antonio Torres-Martino v. Fountain Christian Bilingual School Carolina Inc. · filed 2021-09-30

Lastly, given that VARA does not protect site-specific art, Plaintiffs’ moral rights claims pursuant to the PRMRA, the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code are not preempted.

For an Article 1802 tort claim, the one-year limitations period begins when the plaintiff knows both the damages and the identity of the person who caused them.

Santiago v. AUTONOMOUS MUNICIPALITY OF PONCE · filed 2006-09-27limitations period

The term to institute an action sounding in tort under art. 1802 commences to run from the time a plaintiff has knowledge of the damages as well as the identity of the person who caused them.

The court applied § 5141 to Plaintiffs’ tort claims and held that the statute of limitations barred them.

Rivera-Muñiz v. Horizon Lines Inc. · filed 2010-09-03

As Plaintiffs did not commence this case until October 19, 2009 (Docket No. 1), the statute of limitations bars Plaintiffs’ tort claims.

The court applied Article 1802 in resolving the statute-of-limitations issue for the negligence claim.

Ward v. RIO MAR ASSOCIATES, INC. · filed 2011-06-02

The limitations period for actions brought pursuant to article 1802 is one year.

The court directly applied Article 1802’s one-year limitation period to the § 5141 tort claim, finding tolling for Doral but not DFC.

Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. Doral Financial Corp. · filed 2012-01-265141

Accordingly, each of the communications restarted Article 1802’s one year limitation period, with the May 2010 letter keeping Deutsche’s claim alive until at least May 2011.

The court applied Article 1802's one-year limitations period to determine that the claims were timely.

Estate of Rosario v. Falken Tire Corp. · filed 2015-06-17Article 1802

Puerto Rico law provides that the statute of limitations period is one year for claims pursuant to article 1802.

The court applied Article 1802 to determine the limitations period for the plaintiffs' claims.

Estate of Rosario v. Falken Tire Corp. · filed 2015-06-17

The statute of limitations for article 1802 claims is one year from the time the aggrieved party has knowledge.

The court applied the one-year limitations period for Article 1802 claims and addressed tolling through solidarity.

Kenyon v. Rio · filed 2015-07-17

The parties here agree that the statute of limitations period for plaintiffs’ action is one year.

Claims for fault or negligence under Section 5141 have a one-year limitations period; an extrajudicial claim does not toll it unless properly addressed to the defendant.

Campos-Matos v. Evanstone Insurance · filed 2002-06-19

Article 1868 establishes a one year limitations period for such actions from the time the aggrieved person had knowledge of the injury and could exercise his right. ... We must, therefore, conclude that the extrajudicial claim made by Quetglas in April 1996 was not properly addressed to the debtor. ... Accordingly, plaintiffs’ Complaint is time-barred.

Section 5141 gives a defendant-attachee a damages claim for losses caused by an attachment when the plaintiff does not prevail on its claims.

Estate of Hevia v. Portrio Corp. · filed 2007-07-23

If the plaintiff does not prevail on its claims against the defendant-attachee, that defendant-attachee has a claim under Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 (1979), for the damages arising from the attachment.

The court held that the Puerto Rico Civil Code tort claims, including the claim pleaded under § 5141, could proceed against all defendants, including the individually named defendants.

MacHado v. Sanjurjo · filed 2008-06-03

Further, the tort claims asserted under the Puerto Rico Civil Code provisions shall proceed against all the defendants to this suit including the individually named defendants.

Under Puerto Rico Civil Code Article 1802, a plaintiff must plead plausible, nonconclusory facts showing that the defendant’s negligent or intentional acts caused tangible harm.

Ocasio-Hernandez v. Fortuno-Burset · filed 2009-08-04

However, for an article 1802 claim to prosper, a plaintiff must plead plausible, nonconclusory facts to sustain that a defendant’s negligent or intentional acts caused a tangible harm to the plaintiff.

The court applied Puerto Rico tort law under Article 1802/§ 5141 to decide the independent-contractor negligence claims.

Carr v. Puerto Rico Ports Authority · filed 2011-08-18§ 5141

Under the foregoing standard and based on the undisputed facts of this case, Plaintiffs’ claims against the Ports Authority fail.

The court applied Article 1802 by resolving the damages element against plaintiff and granting summary judgment.

Redondo Construction, Co. v. Izquierdo · filed 2013-05-28

Having found no evidence in the record to support a finding of plaintiffs alleged economic damages, the Court also necessarily finds that plaintiffs damages claim against the individual defendants cannot be established.

The court applied Article 1802/§ 5141 in analyzing sovereign immunity and held that consent to suit under Puerto Rico's general negligence statute does not extend to federal court.

Lebron v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico · filed 2014-10-20§ 5141

Thus, any argument in this regard is waived for lack of development, and we affirm the dismissal of the Puerto Rico claims.

The court held that Puerto Rico's consent to suit under its general negligence statute did not extend to federal court.

Lebron v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico · filed 2014-10-20§ 5141

Thus, any argument in this regard is waived for lack of development, and we affirm the dismissal of the Puerto Rico claims.

Section 5141 does not explicitly waive the Commonwealth’s sovereign immunity from suit in federal court.

Diaz-Fonseca v. Commonwealth of PR · filed 2006-06-16

Neither Section 1802 or 1803 contains an explicit waiver of the Commonwealth's sovereign immunity.

A close relative's claim under § 5141 is derivative, so it survives only if the injured person's underlying employment-discrimination claim survives.

Cabán Hernández v. Philip Morris USA, Inc. · filed 2007-05-01

But such a cause of action is wholly derivative and, thus, its viability is contingent upon the viability of the underlying employment discrimination claim.

A relative’s derivative claim under § 5141 does not require the principal plaintiff to win first, accrues when the relative learns of the injury and wrongful conduct, and may be brought independently.

Figueroa v. JC PENNEY PUERTO RICO · filed 2009-06-11

To recapitulate, a favorable resolution of the principal plaintiff's discrimination claim is not an element of a relative's derivative claim under Article 1802.

Article 1802 allows a relative who suffers emotional harm from tortious injury to a loved one to bring a derivative claim, but the claim depends on the viability of the loved one's underlying claim and is subject to the same forum-selection clause.

Rivera v. Centro Medico De Turabo, Inc. · filed 2009-07-31

This is the only sensible outcome when the related cause of action is not only related to, but dependent upon, the subject cause of action.

Under Puerto Rico Civil Code Article 1802, a spouse's claim is wholly derivative and remains viable only if the underlying employment-discrimination claim is viable; the court applied that rule to political-discrimination claims and vacated the spousal awards after vacating the underlying verdict.

Costa-Urena v. Segarra · filed 2009-12-22

In the past, we have explained that a cause of action under Article 1802 "is wholly derivative and, thus, its viability is contingent upon the viability of the underlying employment discrimination claim."

The court applied § 5141’s survivorship principle to conclude that the plaintiff’s tort-based claims would survive death, although it ultimately dismissed the claims for failure to complete substitution.

Burgos-Yantín v. Municipality of Díaz · filed 2010-07-09§ 5141

Therefore, plaintiff Medina-Mercado’s claims would have survived upon his death, as they were originally pled.

Section 5141 allows a close relative harmed by a loved one's tortious injury to bring a derivative claim against the tortfeasor.

Diaz-Nieves v. United States · filed 2017-06-05

This cause of action is wholly derivative and depends on the viability of the underlying claim of the relative or loved one.

Section 5141 permits a medical-malpractice claim against a physician for negligent supervisory omissions even without direct patient treatment, when the physician had a legal duty to intervene or ensure reasonable treatment.

Calderon-Amezquita v. Rivera-Cruz · filed 2025-10-30§ 5141

The Puerto Rico general tort statute provides that "[a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done."

Section 5141 governs physician liability in medical-malpractice suits and requires a plaintiff to prove the applicable medical-care standard, its breach, and causation.

Wetherell v. Hospital Interamericano De Medicina Avanzada, Inc. · filed 2009-03-31

Under this statute, “three elements comprise a prima facie case of medical malpractice.”

Section 5141 imposes liability for damage caused by fault or negligence, and a medical-malpractice claim under it requires proof of duty, breach, and causation.

Martínez-Serrano v. Quality Health Services of Puerto Rico, Inc. · filed 2009-06-08

[a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.

Section 5141 governs physician liability in medical-malpractice suits and requires proof of duty, breach, and causation.

Morales v. MONAGAS · filed 2010-06-28

Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31 § 5141, governs a physician’s liability in a medical malpractice suit.

The court applied Article 1802 to a Puerto Rico medical-malpractice claim and affirmed summary judgment because the plaintiffs lacked required expert testimony.

Montalvo v. Gonzalez-Amparo · filed 2011-02-23§ 5141

To show medical malpractice, a plaintiff must establish that the care afforded did not meet "the professional requirements generally acknowledged by the medical profession."

The court applied Article 1802 to hold that expert testimony was required to establish physician negligence in this medical-malpractice case and affirmed summary judgment.

Rodríguez-Díaz v. Seguros Triple-S, Inc. · filed 2011-02-23

Rather, the appeal fails because there is a legal rule requiring expert testimony in a case of this character, and possible exceptions to the rule have not been shown to apply.

The court applied Article 1802’s negligence elements to the FTCA medical-malpractice claim and found that plaintiffs failed to prove breach and causation.

Cruz-Mendez v. United States · filed 2012-09-255141

The Court finds that plaintiffs have failed to establish that Dr. Toledo committed an act or omission transgressing the duty of card owed to plaintiff in plaintiff Cruz’s particular circumstances.

The court applied Puerto Rico tort-law standards under § 5141 to the medical-malpractice claims and affirmed summary judgment based on the error-of-judgment defense.

Santana-Concepcion v. Centro Medico del Turabo, Inc. · filed 2014-09-23

The medical malpractice alleged here is the decision of Dr. Rosado to perform the shunt placement operation on Santana-Concepción.

The court identifies Article 1802 as Puerto Rico's general negligence statute and states its operative rule while analyzing the medical-malpractice claim.

Ramirez-Ortiz v. Corporacion del Centro Cardiovascular de Puerto Rico y del Caribe · filed 2014-07-23Article 1802 / § 5141

Puerto Rico’s general negligence statute, article 1802 of the Civil Code, states that “a person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.”

The court applies Article 1802's negligence-and-fault standard to the medical malpractice claim.

Ramirez-Ortiz v. Corporacion del Centro Cardiovascular de Puerto Rico y del Caribe · filed 2014-08-13Article 1802 / § 5141

Medical malpractice liability in Puerto Rico is negligence- and fault-based.

The court applies Article 1802's negligence standard to the medical-malpractice claim.

Ramirez-Ortiz v. Corporacion del Centro Cardiovascular de Puerto Rico y del Caribe · filed 2014-07-23Article 1802

Medical malpractice liability in Puerto Rico is negligence- and fault-based.

The Court states Article 1802's negligence rule and applies it to the medical-malpractice claim.

Ramirez-Ortiz v. Corporacion del Centro Cardiovascular de Puerto Rico y del Caribe · filed 2014-08-13Article 1802

Puerto Rico’s general negligence statute, article 1802 of the Civil Code, states that “a person who by an act or, omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage done.”

Section 5141 governs medical-malpractice actions as a fault-based tort provision.

Rodriguez-Sanchez v. United States · filed 2016-03-30

Under Puerto Rico law, a medical malpractice action is fault-based.

Section 5141 makes medical-malpractice liability fault based and requires duty, breach, and a causal connection between the breach and harm.

Díaz-Casillas v. Doctors' Ctr. Hosp. San Juan · filed 2018-10-23

Medical malpractice liability in Puerto Rico is fault based.

Section 5141 requires a person who causes damage to another through fault or negligence to repair that damage; in a medical-malpractice claim, the plaintiff must establish duty, breach, and causation.

Cortes-Irizarry v. Corporacin Insular De Seguros · filed 1997-04-16

The Puerto Rico Civil Code states that “[a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.” P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 (1991). Under this proviso, three elements comprise a prima facie case of medical malpractice; a plaintiff must establish (1) the duty owed (i.e., the minimum standard of professional knowledge and skill required in the relevant- circumstances), (2) an act or omission transgressing that duty, and (3) a sufficient causal nexus between the breach and the claimed ham.

Section 5141 provides a supplementary tort remedy, so a plaintiff cannot use it for conduct already covered by a specific labor law.

Rojas v. GMD Airlines Services, Inc. · filed 2015-09-09

Article 1802 is only supplementary to special legislation: when a specific labor law covers the conduct for which a plaintiff seeks damages, he is barred from using that same conduct as the basis for a claim under Article 1802.

Section 5141 imposes liability for damage caused through fault or negligence, requiring physical or emotional damage, a negligent or intentional act or omission, and a causal connection; as a supplementary tort provision, it does not support a claim based on the same facts where special legislation governs and limits the available remedy.

Ortiz v. Caparra Center Associates, LLC · filed 2016-03-21

Plaintiffs attempt to ground their claim for money damages under Article 1802, which provides that a person who “causes damages to another through fault or negligence” shall be hable. P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141. This claim requires “(1) the presence of a physical or emotional damage; (2) that the _ damage arose as a consequence of a negligent or intentional act or omission of the defendant; and (3) that there is a causal nexus between the damage suffered and said act or omission.” ... However, an “Article 1802 claim is not cognizable” where it “arises from the same facts as plaintiff s claims under the ADA.” ... This is so because “the tort provision of the Civil Code is supplementary to special legislation.” ... Thus, plaintiffs’ Article 1802 claims are dismissed.

Section 5141 provides a supplementary, general tort cause of action that may support emotional-distress damages when no applicable special law prohibits or limits the claim, and it does not permit a claim based on the same facts as an ADA claim.

Cervantes v. International Hospitality Associates, S. en C. (SE) · filed 2016-05-31

An “Article 1802 claim is not cognizable” where it “arises from the same facts as plaintiffs claims under the ADA.” ... This is so because “the tort provision of the Civil Code is supplementary to special legislation.” ... Indeed, as the Puerto Rico Supreme Court recently explained, “Article 1802 constitutes a general source of law” that can serve as a vehicle for “emotional distress damages ... as long as there is no applicable special law—such as a labor law—that may prohibit or limit such a claim.” ... Because Lavalle attempts to shoehorn into the Article 1802 claim the same facts which form the basis of her ADA claim and does not identify distinct tortious conduct, the claim is not cognizable in this case. ... Thus, Lavalle’s Article 1802 claim is dismissed.

Section 5141 requires a negligence plaintiff to prove duty, breach, damage, and causation, and permits derivative emotional-distress claims only when the injured relative’s underlying claim is viable; claims also require conduct that is tortious under Puerto Rico law and supports private liability.

Nieves v. United States · filed 2015-12-14

The remaining plaintiffs also contend that Puerto Rico Civil Code Article 1802 provides a basis for establishing FTCA liability. Article 1802 states “that ‘[a] person who by act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.’ ” ... “A plaintiff [that grounds FTCA liability by] suing for negligence under Article 1802 must establish four things: a duty requiring the defendant to conform to a certain standard of care, a breach of that duty, proof of damage, and a causal connection between the negligence and the damage.” ... “As the Puerto Rico Supreme Court has ‘repeatedly recognized,’ individuals who suffer distress because a relative or loved one is tortiously injured have a cause of action under Article 1802 against the tortfeasor.” ... This “cause of action is derivative and depends on the viability of the underlying claim of the relative or loved one.” ... Because Joel Diaz’s FTCA claim is not viable, the remaining plaintiffs’ derivative causes of action under Article 1802 also fail. ... Finally, the remaining plaintiffs’ contention that they have a negligence claim under Article 1802 because the arrest warrant was allegedly executed in an unlawful manner fails to state a plausible claim for relief. ... Because the allegations in the complaint describe the reasonable steps the agents took to execute the valid arrest warrant against Joel Diaz, and the remaining plaintiffs cite no authority indicating that Puerto Rico law imposes private liability in such circumstances, their FTCA claims are dismissed.

Article 1802 permits an additional tort or negligence claim only when the alleged conduct is distinct from conduct covered by a specific labor law.

Pérez-Maspons v. Stewart Title Puerto Rico, Inc. · filed 2016-09-16

A plaintiff may bring an additional claim for tortious or negligent conduct under Articles 1802 and 1803 only if the conduct is distinct from the conduct covered by the specific labor law. Reyes-Ortiz v. McConnell Valdes, 714 F.Supp.2d 234, 239 (D.P.R. 2010) (citations omitted); Santini Rivera v. Serv. Air, Inc., 137 D.P.R. 1 (P.R.1994). ... Here, Plaintiff has not set forth independent grounds for a tort claim. As such, Plaintiff is barred from bringing claims under Articles 1802 and 1803 because the conduct Plaintiff alleges is based on the same facts that give rise to Plaintiffs causes of action under Puerto Rico’s retaliation statute. Reyes-Ortiz, 714 F.Supp.2d at 239; see also Blasco Figueroa v. Puerto Rico Aqueducts and Sewer Authority, No. 14-1395 (GAG), 2016 WL 1122003, at *8 (D.P.R. Mar. 22, 2016). Therefore, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs Article 1802 and 1803 claim.

Article 1802 does not permit an additional tort claim for conduct covered by a specific labor law unless the alleged conduct is distinct.

Rodríguez-Cruz v. Stewart Title Puerto Rico, Inc. · filed 2016-09-19

A plaintiff may bring an additional claim for tortious or negligent conduct under Articles 1802 and 1803 only if the conduct is distinct from the conduct covered by the specific labor law. ... Here, Plaintiff has not set forth independent grounds for a tort claim. As such, Plaintiff is barred from bringing a claim under Articles 1802 and 1803 because the conduct Plaintiff alleges is based on the same facts that give rise to Plaintiffs causes of action under Puerto Rico’s anti-discrimination statute.

Section 5141 does not permit an Article 1802 recovery when the same employment conduct is expressly addressed by specific labor legislation.

Lopez-Rosario v. Programa Seasonal Head Start/Early Head Start de la Diocesis de Mayaguez · filed 2017-03-29

Plaintiffs may not obtain recovery from damages pursuant to article 1802 if the conduct that forms the basis for their article 1802 claim is addressed expressly by specific labor or employment legislation.

Section 5141 bars a tort claim based on conduct covered by a specific labor law, but permits an additional claim when the alleged tortious or negligent conduct is distinct.

Ferrer-Marrero v. Misey Restaurant, Inc. · filed 2019-12-13

As the Puerto Rico Supreme Court, and courts in this District have held, to the extent that a specific labor or employment law covers the conduct for which a plaintiff seeks damages, he is barred from using the same conduct to also bring a claim under Article 1802. ... An additional claim under Article 1802 may only be brought by the employee-plaintiff if it is based on tortious or negligent conduct distinct from that covered by the specific labor law(s) invoked.

Section 5141 imposes liability for damages caused by fault or negligence, but an employee may not use Article 1802 for conduct already covered by specific employment laws unless the claim is based on distinct tortious or negligent conduct.

Oquendo v. Costco Wholesale Corporation · filed 2020-04-07

Article 1802 is Puerto Rico’s general tort statute. The statute provides that a person who “causes damages to another through fault or negligence” shall be liable in damages. P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141. ... The Puerto Rico Supreme Court, and courts in this District, have held that to the extent that a specific labor or employment law covers the conduct for which a plaintiff seeks damages, he is barred from using the same conduct to also bring a claim under Article 1802. ... An additional claim under Article 1802 may only be brought by the employee-plaintiff if it is based on tortious or negligent conduct distinct from that covered by the specific labor law(s) invoked.”

Section 5141 provides a general tort remedy for damages caused by fault or negligence, but a plaintiff may not use the same conduct for an Article 1802 claim when a specific labor law covers that conduct; any Article 1802 tort must be distinct.

Rivera-Camacho v. Sociedad Pro Hospital del Nino, Inc. · filed 2021-11-15

Article 1802 of the Civil Code is Puerto Rico’s general tort statute. It states that a person who “causes damages to another through fault or negligence” shall be liable in damages. P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141. ... “The Puerto Rico Supreme Court and courts in this District have held, to the extent that a specific labor or employment law covers the conduct for which a plaintiff seeks damages, he is barred from using the same conduct to also bring a claim under Article 1802” and by extension Article 1803. ... Accordingly, additional claims under Articles 1802 and 1803 “may only be brought by the employee-plaintiff if it is based on tortious or negligent conduct distinct from that covered by the specific labor law(s) invoked.” ... In the case at bar, Plaintiff Rivera-Camacho has not alleged any additional tortious or negligent conduct on behalf of the named Individual Defendants that is not already covered by the above labor laws. Therefore, Rivera-Camacho’s Article 1802 and 1803 claims are dismissed.

Section 5141 imposes liability for damage caused by fault or negligence, but Article 1802 recovery is unavailable when the alleged conduct is exclusively governed by specific labor legislation, while independent tortious conduct concurrent with a discharge may support recovery.

Torres-Segui v. YRC, Inc. · filed 2022-09-28

Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, Puerto Rico’s general tort statute, states that “[a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done.” P.R. Laws Ann. tit 31, § 5141. Plaintiffs may not obtain recovery from damages pursuant to article 1802 if the conduct that forms the basis for their article 1802 claim is addressed expressly by specific labor or employment legislation. See Franceschi-Vázquez v. CVS Pharmacy, 183 F. Supp. 3d 333, 344-45 (D.P.R. 2016) (Besosa, J.) (cataloguing cases). “A wrongfully terminated employee cannot recover [tort] damages for the termination itself. However, ‘if other independent tortious actions concur with the discharge, the employer may be held liable for said conduct.’” Soto-Lebrón v. Fed. Express Corp., 538 F.3d 45, 55 (1st Cir. 2008) (quoting Porto v. Bentley P.R., Inc., 132 D.P.R. 331, 1992 P.R.-Eng. 754,807 (P.R. 1992)) (internal citations omitted). ... Torres cannot recover for the termination itself, which is exclusively remedied by Law 80, but the Court will analyze whether Torres has stated a claim for tortious actions concurrent with the discharge. See Soto-Lebrón, 538 F.3d at 55.

Section 5141 imposes liability for negligent acts or omissions causing damage, but an employee is liable for a coworker’s injury only when the tortious act breaches a personal obligation separate from the employment relationship.

Kientz-Abreu v. Puerto Rico Ports Authority · filed 2021-03-31

Article 1802 imposes liability upon a person for an “act or omission” that “causes damages to another through fault or negligence.” P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141. To recover on a negligence-based tort claim pursuant to Article 1802, “a plaintiff must establish: (1) a duty requiring the defendant to conform to a certain standard of conduct, (2) breach of that duty, (3) proof of damage, and (4) a causal connection between the damage and the tortious conduct.” ... An employee, however, may be liable for a fellow worker’s injuries if the tortious act is not tied to the performance of the sued employee’s functions. Put another way, the act in question must be a breach of the employee’s personal obligations as a citizen, separate and apart from those stemming from the employment relationship.

Section 5141 does not permit a negligence claim for damages arising exclusively from a commercial contract when no separate non-contractual duty exists.

Diaz Mayoral v. FOMB · filed 2021-05-27

The claimants cite no Puerto Rico Supreme Court case in support of their personal injury theory. In our view, that court has never accepted such a broad view of the Puerto Rico negligence statute and prior constructions of the statute argue against recovery on such a theory. "Puerto Rico's negligence statute, [P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141], does not apply in the context of a commercial transaction" where "the damage suffered exclusively arises as a consequence of the breach of an obligation specifically agreed upon, which damage would not occur without the existence of a contract." ... The claimants' alleged damages arise exclusively out of the commercial transaction between the mutual funds and the Commonwealth such that those alleged damages would not have occurred without the existence of that contractual relationship. The Commonwealth has no separate duty with respect to those bonds apart from that contract, let alone a non-contractual duty owed to individuals whose only connection with the bonds is their investment in a corporation that in turn invested in the bonds. The claimants cannot assert a claim under Puerto Rico's negligence statute based on that commercial transaction. See Isla Nena Air Servs., 449 F.3d at 90-91.

Section 5141 requires a person who causes damage to another through fault or negligence to repair it, but a separate negligence claim is unavailable when the alleged damages arise exclusively from contractual duties in a commercial transaction.

CPC Carolina PR, LLC v. Puerto Rico CVS Pharmacy, LLC · filed 2021-08-20

While the Sellers correctly identify the applicable precept, Article 1802 does not swallow the important and “intertwined” duties imposed by the Agreements. ... Here, even assuming without finding that CPC Carolina and CVS pursued a real estate transaction that was somehow doomed to fail, the Sellers’ damages vis-à-vis CPC Carolina ultimately arise because of, and are intertwined with, the duties under the Agreements. ... Accordingly, while a close call, all the Sellers’ tort claims are DISMISSED as to CPC Carolina.

Section 5141 does not provide a tort remedy when the alleged damages arise from duties created exclusively by a contract.

Rojas v. Puerto Rico CVS Pharmacy, LLC · filed 2022-03-31§ 5141

In other words, the damages “ultimately arise because of, and are intertwined with, the duties” set in the sales agreement.

Article 1802 permits relatives of a workplace-discrimination victim to recover for resulting harm, but their claims are derivative of the principal plaintiff’s claim and fail if that claim fails.

Sheridan v. Centerra Group LLC · filed 2022-05-31

Article 1802 provides that “[a] person who by an act or omission causes damage to another through fault or negligence shall be obligated to repair the damage so done.” ... The Puerto Rico Supreme Court has held that in certain circumstances, “relatives of a person who has been the victim of workplace discrimination may bring claims under Article 1802 to be compensated for any harm to them resulting from the discrimination.” ... Yet, those claims are “derivative of the principal plaintiff’s claim” in that they are premised on some harm to the principal plaintiff, and if the principal plaintiff’s claim fails, “so too does the relative's derivative claim.”