People v. Saldaña
People v. Saldaña
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court.
The facts in this case were briefly set forth in our Per Curiam of May 17, 1948, overruling a motion for dismissal filed by the stenographer-appellee, as follows:
‘ ‘ The People of Puerto Rico, represented by the Governor, and in behalf of the Land Authority of Puerto Rico, instituted a condemnation proceeding in the District Court of Bayamón against several defendants. After all the proceedings were had said court rendered judgment on July 3, 1947. Feeling aggrieved the plaintiff appealed and moved the lower court to order the stenographer who took part in the case to do the transcript of the evidence. The court so ordered.
“The stenographer prepared and filed said transcript in the office of the clerk of the lower court and then filed a motion seeking that the plaintiff be ordered to deposit in court $111.60 as his fee, inasmuch as the Land Authority had refused to pay on the ground that The People of Puerto Rico was not bound to pay the fees.
“On January 21, 1948 the lower court entered an order (sic) granting the stenographer’s motion and ordered the plaintiff to deposit the $111.60 in the office of the clerk of said court within the term of five days. The plaintiff appealed to this court. ’ ’
The only error assigned by appellant is that the lower court ordered the People of Puerto Pico to pay fees to the stenographer-reporter.
Pursuant to § 5 of the Act providing for the appointment of the stenographer-reporter of the district courts, fixing their duties and compensation, of March 10, 1904, the court stenographer is bound to furnish a copy of the transcript of the evidence free of charge, among other cases, when it is requested in the name of The People of Puerto Pico.
In the case at bar the plaintiff is The People of Puerto
Therefore, the cases where the Land Authority of Puerto Eico may by itself institute condemnation proceedings are expressly limited by law. In all other cases, like in the one at bar, if said Authority wishes to acquire title or interest on any real property, either by purchase or by condemnation, it must comply with § 11 of the Land Law
. We have, in addition, that the Land Law itself in its § 2, in creating the Land Authority of .Puerto Eico provided that it should form part of the Department of Agriculture
The order is reversed.
See the provisions of Act No. 39 of April 20, 1942 (Regular Session, page 446), as a result of our decision in P. R. Ry. Lt. P. Co. v. Ortiz, Judge, 59 P.R.R. 912.
See § 2 of Act No. 19 of November 30, 1942 (Seeond and Third Special Sessions of 1942, page 82), amending $ 3(a) of the Eminent Domain Act.
Section 11 provides that “The Insular Government shall have power to-acquire, at the request of the Authority and in behalf thereof, by purchase, or by expropriation in the manner provided by this Act and Insular laws in regard to expropriation, title to any real property or estate thereon which might be necessary or advisable for the purposes of the Authority, and the-latter shall pay for the whole of said real property. The power hereby vested shall not limit or restrict the power of the Authority itself to acquire real property by purchase or expropriation. ’ ’
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.