Federal Court of Appeals in favor of Zuleka Rivera in the case against Grace Stores

A panel of three judges Court of Appeals for the First Round in Boston In a case involving former Miss Universe 2006, a judge in the federal court of the district of Puerto Rico quashed the dismissal ordered by Ida Delcado Cologne. Zuleka Rivera Mendoza v. Cress Stores of Puerto Rico, Inc.Definitely breach of contract, damages.

Comment and order in a 21-page document written by the judges yesterday Tuesday Bruce Celia, William Coetta, Jr..And Sandra Lynch, The federal court for the district of Puerto Rico ordered that legal proceedings be instituted and that expenses and fees incurred by Rivera Mendoza be taxed in his favor..

The committee discussed whether the forum selection rule was allowed or mandatory to resolve any dispute between the parties. Under this provision, the licensee is in agreement with the legal representative of Cress Stores in this case Louis Martinez LawrenceIf there is any difference between Riviera Mendoza and Cress Stores, first of all, San Juan’s first case should have been heard in court.

However, the panel of judges ruled that Judge Delcado Cologne had failed to accept the dismissal filed by Cress Stores and ordered the parties to bring the case to court in San Juan. Not only to the jurisdiction of a particular forum, but also to the court of San Juan’s first instance.

With this opinion and order, the case is now being considered by a federal court in San Juan based on its merits.

Rivera Mendoza, mr. Edwin Prado Kalarsa, The company and its CEO sued Grease Stores and Puerto Rico in Puerto Rico on July 17, 2020, for allegedly failing to pay under a business agreement signed in August 2009. This allowed Rivera Mendoza’s name, figure and appearance and the title of Miss Universe 2006 to be used exclusively in clothing and perfumery. Alternatively, Rivera Mendoza will receive an annual stipend of $ 125,000.

The original contract was for two years, but it was renewed until August 2012 with a modified annual payment of $ 112,500. Subsequently, the contract was renewed until August 2018 but verbally renewed. However, Rivera Mendoza claims that Gress did not pay the equivalent fee for 2018 and that the company tried to reconsider the amount paid and that it did not prosper. After serving Cress with a late payment bill and a stop and resignation letter to use Rivera Mendoza’s name, origin and title, Gress announced that he would pay part of the money and pay the remaining amount through a payment plan.

Cress noted that they did not have commercials in their stores with the name of any former cosmic beauty, but, in that case, Rivera Mendoza insisted that the company continued to sell its inventory and that it never accepted the payment plan. .

Although Puerto Rico’s Grace Stores approves cash loan with Riviera Mendoza The company and Forrestiv filed for dismissal because, first, by suing at the federal level, Rivera Mendoza violated the terms of the contract for council selection.

Prestivin filed a petition for dismissal, claiming that he could not be prosecuted in his personal capacity. Judge Delcado Cologne accepted the company’s dismissal on March 12, 2021, in his opinion and order. Rivera Mendoza first violated the agreement by suing at the federal level and the first case was not in court. Delcado Cologne did not accept Prestige’s movement because he realized it was inappropriate after accepting Puerto Rico’s Cress.

However, the Court of Appeals in Boston concluded that Delcado Cologne’s dismissal decision was erroneous because the second of two arguments in the document submitted by Prado Kalarsa was not followed.

In essence, The panel of judges ruled that the language used to form the forum did not have to sue in the trial court and that it only authorized the case to be heard in a designated forum and did not compel the parties to use that forum. Specific. In particular, the judges noted that “no words or languages ​​were used that reasonably suggest that a forum should be used exclusively.”

Consequently, the judges ruled that the language of the dispute rule only reflects the consent of the parties to submit to the jurisdiction of a particular forum, but the first instance is not exclusive to the court. Therefore, “that type of limited consent does not, by its terms, preclude the jurisdiction of another court or tribunal.”

The district court erred in dismissing the case on the basis of a court order, ”the judges added.

Finally, the panel added that it had erred in accepting the dismissal of Cress Stores and in dismissing the Delcado Cologne case outright. Accordingly, the panel reversed Delcado Colon’s resolution that Frestiv’s rejection motion had become irrelevant by ruling in favor of Cress’s motion, and that it should now be analyzed on the basis of its merits.

For his part, Martínez Llorens said New day He emphasized that the decision was not a signal of a formal antitrust inquiry into the allegations, but rather a signal of a formal antitrust inquiry into the allegations.

“Our argument is that the applicable precedent was settled a few years ago with a circumstance and a rule similar to ours. . Therefore, in that sense, since nothing has been resolved in this case, we will proceed with the case under that precedent. There was a dispute over whether this case should be settled at the local or federal level, and now that they have decided that it will be resolved at the federal level, we are going to defend ourselves in the federal level.”, Martinez Lawrence insisted.

“Now the Boston court must pass the so-called order, which basically says ‘We have already decided, and now you have to pursue your case.’ That did not happen, so for now, there is no date to restart the process. , ”The lawyer added.

In March of this year Kress stores began to close their doors.