{"id":579,"date":"2025-10-27T23:07:39","date_gmt":"2025-10-27T23:07:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/?page_id=579"},"modified":"2025-10-29T22:10:01","modified_gmt":"2025-10-29T22:10:01","slug":"z","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/?page_id=579","title":{"rendered":"Moci\u00f3n para desestimar caso de antenas"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO\nTRIBUNAL GENERAL DE JUSTICIA\nTRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES\nPANEL V<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

MOCI\u00d3N SOLICITANDO DESESTIMACI\u00d3N POR MOTIVOS <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>
JURISDICCIONALES<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>

<\/p>

HONORABLE TRIBUNAL:<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>

<\/p>

<\/p>

<\/p>

COMPARECE <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong>la parte Demandante-Apelada de ep\u00edgrafe, Asociaci\u00f3n de Residentes de Haciendas del Dorado, Inc., por conducto de su representaci\u00f3n legal que suscribe y respetuosamente EXPONE, ALEGA Y SOLICITA:<\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

<\/p>

<\/p>

1. El d\u00eda <\/span>28 de agosto de 2025,<\/b> notificado su archivo en autos el mismo d\u00eda, el Excmo. TPI, Sala Superior de Bayam\u00f3n, emiti\u00f3 la Sentencia del caso de ep\u00edgrafe.<\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

2. El d\u00eda <\/span>29 de septiembre de 2025<\/b>, en horas de la ma\u00f1ana del \u00faltimo d\u00eda de los t\u00e9rminos para ello, la Parte Apelante, Elite Towers LLC (en adelante \u201cElite\u201d), present\u00f3 el primer recurso de Apelaci\u00f3n de ep\u00edgrafe, en los casos consolidados de este tr\u00e1mite, contra la Sentencia del anterior ac\u00e1pite.<\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

3. El mismo aparente no haber sido debidamente notificado a todas las partes del caso a nivel de Primera Instancia; espec\u00edficamente no notificado a <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Inmobiliaria R\u00edo Lajas, Inc.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> (en adelante \u201cInmobiliaria\u201d), quien fue debidamente emplazado y debidamente diligenciada la Orden y Citaci\u00f3n (v\u00e9ase en <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Ent. 28, ANEJOS<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> ) a la vista del <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>art. 14.1, Ley N\u00fam. 161-2009<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> , de este proceso en esa Primera Instancia y quien consta en el ep\u00edgrafe de estos recursos consolidados.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

4. La aparente falta de notificaci\u00f3n del recurso de Elite a Inmobiliaria surge claramente del correo electr\u00f3nico de notificaci\u00f3n del recurso que hizo Elite a esta Parte y que incluye un correo electr\u00f3nico que, presume, ser notificado a Inmobiliaria, se adjunta el mismo como <\/span>ANEJO 1<\/b>.<\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

<\/p>

5. Pero, esta direcci\u00f3n de correo electr\u00f3nico de Inmobiliaria es <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>desconocida en el expediente judicial, nunca fue dada por Inmobiliaria en el procedimiento ante el Hon. TPI,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> ni por ninguna de las Partes; porque la <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>direcci\u00f3n de Inmobiliaria R\u00edo Lajas, Inc., que fue dada por esta Parte,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> seg\u00fan surge del Registro de Corporaciones del Departamento de Estado, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>en nuestra Demanda Enmendada fue su <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>direcci\u00f3n postal<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span> (v\u00e9ase <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Ent. 18, ANEJO 1, p\u00e1g. 2-3, alegaci\u00f3n afirmativa n\u00fam. 7<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> ).\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

6. Por otra parte, <\/span>ese mismo d\u00eda 29 de septiembre de 2025<\/b>, en horas de la noche, Solares y Terrenos del Terru\u00f1o LLC (en adelante \u201cSolares\u201d) present\u00f3 el otro Recurso de Apelaci\u00f3n de ep\u00edgrafe, contra la misma Sentencia apelada por Elite.<\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

7. Pero, en el <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>certificado<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em> de notificaci\u00f3n del Recurso de ep\u00edgrafe de Solares y Terrenos del Terru\u00f1o LLC <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>tampoco surge que el Apelante haya notificado debidamente el Recurso de Apelaci\u00f3n a Inmobiliaria R\u00edo Lajas,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> Inc. Surge del mismo que certificado que la presentaci\u00f3n del recurso se hizo mediante SUMAC \u201cel cual da aviso al mismo tiempo a todos los abogados de expediente a sus respectivas direcciones electr\u00f3nicas, lo cual constituye la notificaci\u00f3n que debe efectuarse entre abogados y abogadas, seg\u00fan dispongan las Reglas de Procedimiento Civil\u201d, v\u00e9ase el Recurso de Solares a la p\u00e1gina 15.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

<\/p>

8. Esta Parte no recibi\u00f3 ninguna otra notificaci\u00f3n del recurso de Apelaci\u00f3n de Solares, ni ese d\u00eda ni despu\u00e9s.<\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

9. Tampoco, despu\u00e9s de la presentaci\u00f3n del recurso de Apelaci\u00f3n de Solares, este no presentado, dentro de las cuarenta y ocho (48) horas siguientes a la presentaci\u00f3n del escrito, <\/span>ninguna certificaci\u00f3n de notificaci\u00f3n suplementaria<\/span><\/span> que acredite la notificaci\u00f3n a Inmobiliaria; quien surge como parte en el ep\u00edgrafe del recurso.<\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

10. Tampoco Elite Towers LLC present\u00f3, dentro de dicho t\u00e9rmino, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>ninguna certificaci\u00f3n de notificaci\u00f3n suplementaria<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> que acredite la notificaci\u00f3n a Inmobiliaria; quien surge como parte en el ep\u00edgrafe del recurso.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

11. Valga acreditar que Inmobiliaria, a pesar de haber sido debidamente tramitado al pleito, nunca cont\u00f3 con un abogado en el expediente; ni brind\u00f3 ninguna otra direcci\u00f3n, ni postal y electr\u00f3nica, en el caso; solo la direcci\u00f3n postal que surge de la Demanda.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

12. Dicen nuestras <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Reglas de Procedimiento Civil, infra<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> , que \u201c[l]os <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>recursos de apelaci\u00f3n<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> al Tribunal de Apelaciones o al Tribunal Supremo para revisar sentencias <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>deber\u00e1n ser presentaciones dentro del t\u00e9rmino <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>jurisdiccional<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> de treinta (30) d\u00edas contados desde el archivo en autos de copia de la notificaci\u00f3n de la sentencia<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> dictada por el tribunal apelado\u201d, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 52.2 de las de Procedimiento Civil, 32 LPRA Ap. V, R. 52.2.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

13. As\u00ed, sustantivamente se expresa en el primer p\u00e1rrafo de la <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 13(A) del Reglamento del Tribunal de Apelaciones, 4A LPRA Ap. XXII-B, R. 13.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> La anterior Regla sigue expresando c\u00f3mo debe hacerse la notificaci\u00f3n a las partes; expresa la misma Regla que”[l]a <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>parte apelante notificar\u00e1 el recurso de apelaci\u00f3n debidamente sellado con la fecha y hora de su presentaci\u00f3n<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> mediante correo certificado o servicio de entrega por empresa privada con acuse de recibo. Podr\u00e1, adem\u00e1s, utilizar los siguientes m\u00e9todos sujetos a lo dispuesto en estas reglas: correo ordinario, entrega personal, telefax o correo electr\u00f3nico, siempre que el documento notificado sea copia fiel y exacta del documento original”. (\u00e9nfasis suplido), Regla 13(B)(2), ante.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

14. Expresa la anterior Regla que \u201c[l]a presentaci\u00f3n electr\u00f3nica de un recurso de apelaci\u00f3n constituir\u00e1 la notificaci\u00f3n que debe efectuarse entre abogados y abogadas\u201d. <\/span>Pero, inmediatamente aclara que<\/span><\/span>, emitida la notificaci\u00f3n mediante la plataforma SUMAC, <\/span>\u201c[s]er\u00e1 responsabilidad de la parte apelante <\/span>corroborar que la informaci\u00f3n que surja de esta notificaci\u00f3n autom\u00e1tica sea correcta\u201d, ante<\/b>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

15. Sigue expresando la anterior Regla, en cuanto a la notificaci\u00f3n del recurso mediante correo electr\u00f3nico, que debe hacerse <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>\u201ca la direcci\u00f3n electr\u00f3nica correspondiente<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> de los abogados o abogadas que representan a las partes o al de la partes, de no estar representadas por abogado o abogada, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>cuando <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>las partes<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> a ser notificadas <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>hubieren provisto al tribunal una direcci\u00f3n electr\u00f3nica<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> y as\u00ed surja de los del caso ante el Tribunal de autos Instancia\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> , seg\u00fan Primera exige la <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 13(B)(2), ante.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

16. Contin\u00faa el anterior Reglamento, sobre la notificaci\u00f3n de los recursos, que “La <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>parte apelante certificar\u00e1 al Tribunal de Apelaciones en el escrito de apelaci\u00f3n el m\u00e9todo mediante el cual notific\u00f3 a las partes y el cumplimiento con el t\u00e9rmino dispuesto para ello.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> La parte apelante <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>podr\u00e1 certificar al tribunal en una moci\u00f3n suplementaria cualquier cambio en cuanto a la certificaci\u00f3n original<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> , dentro de los cuarenta y ocho horas indicando a la presentaci\u00f3n del escrito de apelaci\u00f3n. El t\u00e9rmino aqu\u00ed dispuesto ser\u00e1 <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>de cumplimiento estricto<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> .”, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 15, ante.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

17. Ha expresado nuestro Excmo. Tribunal Supremo, interpretando las reglas sustantivas anteriores sobre la notificaci\u00f3n de los recursos apelativos ante este Excmo. Tribunal de Apelaciones, que \u201cha sido enf\u00e1tico al resolver que la notificaci\u00f3n a las partes, o sus abogados, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>es un requisito jurisdiccional<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> \u201d (\u00e9nfasis suplido), <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Medina Garay v Medina Garay<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/span> , 161 DPR 806, 815-816 (2004), citando a: <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Col\u00f3n Morales v. Rivera Morales<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/span> , 146 DPR 930 (1998); <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>S\u00c1NCHEZ MART\u00cdNEZ, HIRAM A., <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>PR\u00c1CTICA JUR\u00cdDICA DE PUERTO RICO, DERECHO PROCESAL APELATIVO, PUERTO RICO,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> Lexis-Nexis de Puerto Rico, Inc., 2001, p\u00e1g. 185.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

18. Por lo que ha expresado que, \u201c[e]n consecuencia, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>son dos (2) los requisitos jurisdiccionales en la presentaci\u00f3n de recursos de apelaci\u00f3n<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> -ante el Tribunal de Apelaciones- de sentencias finales dictadas en casos civiles provenientes del Tribunal de Primera Instancia, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>a saber<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>: (i) el t\u00e9rmino para presentar el recurso y (ii) <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>la notificaci\u00f3n del recurso a las dem\u00e1s partes dentro del mismo plazo<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>.\u201d (\u00e9nfasis suplido), <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Medina v Medina<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em>,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> supra, p\u00e1g. 816, citando a; <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>M\u00e9ndez v. Corp. Quintas San Luis<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em>,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> 127 DPR 635 (1991); <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Gonz\u00e1lez Santos contra Bourns PR, Inc.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/span>, 125 DPR 48, 57 (1989); <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>S\u00c1NCHEZ MART\u00cdNEZ, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>OB. CIT<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> ., p\u00e1g. 185-86.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

19. Aclara el caso de <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Medina v Medina<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/span>, supra, que \u201cel t\u00e9rmino <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>‘parte’<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span> va atado a <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>que la persona haya sido notificada del litigio.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u201d (\u00e9nfasis suplido), <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>ante<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/span> .\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

20. Con relaci\u00f3n a lo anterior, expresa nuestro Excmo. Tribunal Supremo, en relaci\u00f3n a su facultad apelativa, que, \u201cpara poder ejercitar v\u00e1lidamente dicha autoridad, debemos poseer jurisdicci\u00f3n sobre la materia y sobre las personas envueltas en el litigio.\u201d, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>ante<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em> , p\u00e1g. 817.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>

21. Sabido es que \u201cLa jurisdicci\u00f3n es el poder o autoridad que ostenta un tribunal para decidir casos o controversias.<\/span> [y] La falta de jurisdicci\u00f3n de un tribunal incide directamente sobre el poder mismo para adjudicar una controversia.\u201d<\/span><\/span> (\u00e9nfasis suplido y citas omitidas), <\/span>Peerles Oil v Hermanos Torres,<\/span><\/i><\/span> 186 DPR 239, 249-250.<\/span><\/p>

22. Expresa el anterior caso que \u201c<\/span><\/span>las cuestiones relativas a la jurisdicci\u00f3n de un tribunal son privilegiadas y c\u00f3mo tal deben atenderse y resolverse con preferencia a cualesquiera otras\u201d<\/span>,<\/span> ante,<\/span> p\u00e1g. 250, citando a; <\/span>SLG Szendrey-Ramos contra F. Castillo<\/span><\/i><\/span>,<\/span> 169 DPR 873, 882 (2007). (2012).<\/span><\/p>

23. Por \u00faltimo, tambi\u00e9n expresa el Reglamento de este Hon. Tribunal, en cuanto a las solicitudes de desestimaci\u00f3n, que: <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>(B) Una parte podr\u00e1 solicitar en cualquier momento la desestimaci\u00f3n de un recurso por los siguientes motivos<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>: (1) <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>que el Tribunal de Apelaciones carece de jurisdicci\u00f3n<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>; (2) que el <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>recurso fue presentado fuera del t\u00e9rmino de cumplimiento estricto dispuesto por ley <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>sin que exista justa causa para ello;<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u2026 (C) El Tribunal de Apelaciones, a iniciativa propia, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>podr\u00e1 desestimar un recurso de apelaci\u00f3n<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> o denegar un auto discrecional <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>por cualquiera de los motivos consignados en el inciso (B) precedente<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> . El tribunal <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>no pierde jurisdicci\u00f3n por el incumplimiento de una parte con un requisitomentario <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> que no es de naturaleza jurisdiccional o de cumplimiento estricto.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> (D) Las resoluciones que emita el Tribunal de Apelaciones bajo esta regla deber\u00e1n ser fundamentadas. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 83 del Reglamento del Tribunal de Apelaciones, supra.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>

24. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>En este caso<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span> , como ya se acredit\u00f3, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Inmobiliaria R\u00edo Lajas, Inc., es una parte en el <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>pleito de ep\u00edgrafe,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> que fue debidamente emplazada, tra\u00edda al pleito, seg\u00fan <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Ent. 28, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong>A\u00d1OS.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>

25. Pero, el Demandado-Apelante, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Elite, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>no<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> notific\u00f3 debidamente a Inmobiliaria<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>, a la \u00faltima direcci\u00f3n que consta en el expediente de \u00e9sta (v\u00e9ase el <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>ANEJO 1)<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> . F\u00edjese este Excmo. Tribunal que, seg\u00fan la Regla espec\u00edfica para ello, la notificaci\u00f3n de un recurso por correo electr\u00f3nico, directamente a una parte, procede <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>\u201ccuando [1] las partes a ser notificadas <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>hubieren provisto al tribunal una direcci\u00f3n electr\u00f3nica y [2] as\u00ed surja de los autos del caso ante el Tribunal de Primera Instancia\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span>, seg\u00fan exige la Regla 13(B)(2) del Reglamento del Tribunal de Apelaciones, supra.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

26. En este caso <\/span>(1) Inmobiliaria nunca provey\u00f3<\/span><\/span> al Hon. TPI <\/span>ninguna direcci\u00f3n electr\u00f3nica para ser notificada;<\/span><\/span> la direcci\u00f3n que surge, que la provey\u00f3 esta Parte, es una direcci\u00f3n postal, la que surge del Registro de Corporaciones del Departamento del Estado (v\u00e9ase en Ent. 18, ANEJO 1, p\u00e1g. 2-3,<\/strong> alegaci\u00f3n afirmativa n\u00fam. 7).<\/span><\/p>

27. Y, (2) <\/span><\/span>esta supuesta direcci\u00f3n electr\u00f3nica <\/span><\/span>de Inmobiliaria a la que notific\u00f3 Elite <\/span>tampoco \u201csurge de los autos del caso ante el Hon. Tribunal de Primera Instancia\u201d.<\/span> Nunca fue provista en ning\u00fan escrito de ninguna parte.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

28. Ciertamente, ahora la referida <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 13(B)(1), Reglamento del Tribunal de Apelaciones, supra<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong>, expresa que el t\u00e9rmino para la notificaci\u00f3n de todos los recursos es un t\u00e9rmino de cumplimiento estricto. Pero, en cuanto a que la notificaci\u00f3n efectiva, seg\u00fan estatuida, sea un requisito para que el Excmo. El tribunal adquiera jurisdicci\u00f3n sobre el recurso se mantiene inc\u00f3lume. El proceso debido de ley <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>establece la forma de hacer la notificaci\u00f3n en las distintas formas que la misma regla proporciona para la notificaci\u00f3n<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> . Y, exige la \u201c <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>responsabilidad <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>de la parte apelante [de] corroborar que la informaci\u00f3n que surja de esta notificaci\u00f3n autom\u00e1tica sea correcta<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span> .<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u201d, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 13(B)(2), ante;<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> dejando palmariamente claro e inc\u00f3lume que, a pesar de la bondad de este Excmo. Tribunal General de Justicia de, ahora, proveer\u00e1 la notificaci\u00f3n autom\u00e1tica de los recursos mediante SUMAC, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>es la responsabilidad de la Parte que acude a este Hon. Tribunal de corroborar que la notificaci\u00f3n fue correcta, o sea, efectiva -que es el requisito jurisdiccional-, dentro del t\u00e9rmino de cumplimiento estricto.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

29. Adem\u00e1s, no existe una causa justa para que no se haya cumplido con la notificaci\u00f3n adecuada debida; ni dentro del t\u00e9rmino de cumplimiento estricto para la notificaci\u00f3n del recurso, seg\u00fan la <\/span>Regla 13(B)(2)<\/b>, ante; ni hay justa causa, debida la corroboraci\u00f3n por los Apelantes -tanto Elite como Solares-, que pod\u00eda ser subsanada mediante una certificaci\u00f3n de notificaci\u00f3n suplementaria, seg\u00fan la <\/span>Regla 15<\/b>, ante, para que los Apelantes no cumplieran con su deber de suplementar la certificaci\u00f3n de notificaci\u00f3n en ese t\u00e9rmino de cumplimiento estricto de cuarenta y ocho (48) horas; ambas cosas suficientes para la desestimaci\u00f3n de ambos recursos bajo la <\/span>Regla 83(B)(2), ante.<\/b><\/p>

30. Respetuosamente, no se trata de que, constructivamente, haya habido alguna notificaci\u00f3n del recurso -cosa que igual negamos que haya sucedido, porque no se acreditar\u00e1 en ninguna de las formas debidas-; sino, que <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>la notificaci\u00f3n <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>adecuada<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> de los recursos son, seg\u00fan citamos, requisitos jurisdiccionales, los cuales, de no cumplirse en el t\u00e9rmino de cumplimiento estricto -sin justa causa en t\u00e9rmino tambi\u00e9n-, privan de autoridad al Tribunal para ejercer su funci\u00f3n revisora. Por lo que no se puede tomar livianamente, ya que incide sobre los derechos de todas las partes en todos los casos.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> Abrir esta puerta puede representar, ante litigantes inescrupulosos, una llave para no notificaci\u00f3n de recursos a alguna parte que tengan intereses que, a pesar de que las alegaciones afirmativas en Primera Instancia no le afectar\u00e1n y decidiera no comparecer, s\u00ed se pueda ver afectado por las alegaciones y, posteriores, Sentencias y Resoluciones de este Tribunal, seg\u00fan se\u00f1aladas en los recursos, para que comparezcan a ejercer su derecho si as\u00ed quieren.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

31. Ni este Excmo. Tribunal, ni ning\u00fan Tribunal, ni ninguna de las Partes, tenemos forma alguna de saber que se notific\u00f3 a alguna otra de las partes -en ning\u00fan pleito cuando <\/span>se notifica a una direcci\u00f3n de la parte que nadie conoce y que nunca ha sido corroborada, ni por el Tribunal que presidi\u00f3 el caso;<\/span><\/span> la doble corroboraci\u00f3n que exige la <\/span>Regla 13(B)(2),<\/b> supra, para la notificaci\u00f3n mediante correo electr\u00f3nico asegura que se pueda constatar que se notific\u00f3 efectivamente a una parte mediante el mecanismo del correo electr\u00f3nico; porque se puede constatar <\/span>(1)<\/b> que la parte la provey\u00f3 y <\/span>(2)<\/b> que consta en los autos del Tribunal, v\u00e9ase <\/span>ante.<\/b><\/p>

32. Por otro lado, seg\u00fan respetuosamente entendemos y se deduce, el <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Demandado Apelante, Solares no notific\u00f3 debidamente su recurso a Inmobiliaria, de ninguna <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>manera; que era parte en el pleito y deb\u00eda ser notificada para que este Hon. El tribunal <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>puede asumir competencia sobre el recurso de Solares.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

33. No lo notific\u00f3 a Solares en su recurso, seg\u00fan surge de su certificado de notificaci\u00f3n del recurso; que solo expresa que notific\u00f3 a trav\u00e9s de SUMAC, a pesar de que Inmobiliaria no compareci\u00f3 representada por abogado al pleito para que tuviese un representante legal que notificara por SUMAC. Y no fue notificada la parte tampoco; al menos, seg\u00fan respetuosamente entendemos, no consta de ning\u00fan escrito o acreditaci\u00f3n del hecho.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

34.Tampoco Elite ni Solares, dentro del t\u00e9rmino de cuarenta y ocho (48) horas de presentado su recurso, present\u00f3, ninguno, una moci\u00f3n suplementaria de certificaci\u00f3n de notificaci\u00f3n en donde corrigiera y acreditara que s\u00ed hubiera notificado, debidamente, a Inmobiliaria R\u00edo Lajas, Inc.; \u00faltimo que tambi\u00e9n deb\u00eda suplementarse en un t\u00e9rmino de cumplimiento estricto, y ni se hizo ni se justific\u00f3 seg\u00fan la <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 15, ante.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> Dicho cumplimiento, o la justificaci\u00f3n para dicho incumplimiento en t\u00e9rmino, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>no ha existido en este caso<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> .<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

35. Por lo anterior, irremediablemente, entendemos que ambos, Elite Towers LLC y Solares y Terrenos del Terru\u00f1o LLC, no cumplieron con un requisito jurisdiccional para que este Hon. Tribunal pudiese asumir autoridad sobre sus recursos, v\u00e9ase <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Medina v Medina<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em> , supra, y <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Col\u00f3n v Rivera<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/span> , supra.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p>

36. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Enfatizamos<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> , ya las Reglas para el perfeccionamiento de los recursos ante este Hon. Tribunal fueron flexibilizados para que ciertos defectos de notificaci\u00f3n no afectar\u00e1n dicho perfeccionamiento; pero no se puede llegar al extremo de que, bajo ninguno de los mecanismos establecidos, llegue al extremo de no notificaci\u00f3n a una parte. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Esto salta un mero defecto de notificaci\u00f3n e incide directamente sobre el <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>debido proceso de ley constitucional<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span> ; no puede ser permitido que se resuelva perfeccionado un recurso sin que se haya notificado a una de las Partes en el pleito en un tribunal inferior, ser\u00eda una perversi\u00f3n del proceso y mina la credibilidad del sistema de justicia apelativa que imparte este Excmo. Tribunal.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

37. Entonces, forzosamente, este Excmo. Tribunal no adquiri\u00f3 jurisdicci\u00f3n, en el t\u00e9rmino debido para ello y sin ninguna justificaci\u00f3n, de ninguno de los recursos consolidados de ep\u00edgrafe, y <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>los mismos deben ser desestimados por motivos jurisdiccionales<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> <\/span> seg\u00fan la <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 83(B) del Reglamento de este Excmo. Tribunal de Apelaciones.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>

\u00a0 POR TODO LO CUAL,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> se suplica de este Honorable Tribunal que tome conocimiento de lo informado y, en atenci\u00f3n a los hechos y el derecho argumentado en este escrito, <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>desestime ambos recursos de Apelaci\u00f3n<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span> , presentados por Elite Towers LLC y Solares y Terrenos del Terru\u00f1o LLC, por falta de notificaci\u00f3n debida ni suplementar la certificaci\u00f3n para que corrobore la notificaci\u00f3n debida y en la forma dispuesta por el Reglamento de este Hon. Tribunal de Apelaciones, seg\u00fan establece la <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>Regla 83(B) del Reglamento de este Excmo. Tribunal, supra,<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> con cualquier otro pronunciamiento que en derecho proceda.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

\u00a0 RESPETUOSAMENTE SOMETIDO.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> En Jayuya para San Juan, Puerto Rico, a 6 de octubre de 2025.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

\u00a0 CERTIFICO<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong> que en el d\u00eda de hoy fue notificada con copia fiel y exacta de este escrito a los dem\u00e1s abogados de las partes del caso, mediante la debida notificaci\u00f3n autom\u00e1tica que emite SUMAC. Y, a Inmobiliaria R\u00edo Lajas, Inc., a su \u00faltima direcci\u00f3n postal que surge de los autos del caso a nivel del Hon. Tribunal de Primera Instancia, PO Box 19079, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00919-1079.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

f\/: Lcdo. Jes\u00fas M. Morales Irizarry <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>
RUA N\u00famero 20,284 <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>
Col. N\u00famero 20,859 <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>
PO Box 257 <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>
Ponce, PR 00715 <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>
(787) 685-0322 <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span>
lcdo.moralesirizarry@gmail.com<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>

<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO TRIBUNAL GENERAL DE JUSTICIA TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL V MOCI\u00d3N SOLICITANDO DESESTIMACI\u00d3N POR MOTIVOS JURISDICCIONALES HONORABLE TRIBUNAL: COMPARECE la parte Demandante-Apelada de ep\u00edgrafe, Asociaci\u00f3n de Residentes de Haciendas del Dorado, Inc., por conducto de su representaci\u00f3n legal que suscribe y respetuosamente EXPONE, ALEGA Y SOLICITA: 1. El d\u00eda 28…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"elementor_theme","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-579","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/579","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=579"}],"version-history":[{"count":53,"href":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/579\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":816,"href":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/579\/revisions\/816"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/haciendasdeldorado.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=579"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}