Rodriguez v. Moralese
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Rodriguez v. Moralese
Opinion
USCA1 Opinion
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
____________________
No. 97-1393
JOSE F. RODRIGUEZ, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs, Appellees,
v.
PRUDENTIAL-BACHE SECURITIES, INC.,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
ANA M. MORALES,
Defendant, Appellant.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. Salvador E. Casellas, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Lynch, Circuit Judge, _____________
and Gierbolini,* Senior District Judge. _____________________
_____________________
Jos Luis Gonz lez-Casta er was on brief for appellant. ___________________________
Carlos A. Bobonis-Gonz lez, with whom Bobonis, Bobonis & ___________________________ ___________________
Rodr guez Poventud was on brief for appellee. __________________
____________________
February 26, 1998
____________________
____________________
* Of the District of Puerto Rico, sitting by designation.
Per Curiam. Plaintiff Ana M. Morales ("Morales") Per Curiam. ___________
appeals the district court's grant of defendant Prudential-Bache
Securities, Inc.'s ("Prudential's") cross-motion for summary
judgment in this wrongful termination dispute. We affirm.
On December 28, 1990, Morales, her husband, Jos F.
Rodr guez ("Rodr guez"), and their conjugal partnership filed a
complaint in the District Court of Puerto Rico against Rodr guez'
former employer, Prudential, seeking redress in connection with
the brokerage firm's February 1990 closing of its Puerto Rico
subsidiary and its termination of Rodr guez' employment. The
plaintiffs asserted seven causes of action arising out of
Prudential's alleged wrongful termination of its contractual
relationship with Rodr guez. Six of the seven causes of action
were brought on behalf of Rodr guez and the conjugal partnership.
The remaining cause of action sought compensation on Morales'
behalf for damages she suffered as a result of the direct injury
to her husband by Prudential.
The district court ordered the parties to proceed with
arbitration of all claims pertaining to Rodr guez before an
arbitration panel of the New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE"). The
district court stayed the claims of Morales and the conjugal
partnership pending the outcome of the arbitration. Rodr guez
and the conjugal partnership arbitrated their claims before the
NYSE, and the arbitration panel awarded him $1,014,250 plus costs
and attorney's fees in full and final settlement of all claims.
Thereafter, Prudential's petitioned the district court to vacate
-2-
the award, but the court entered judgment for Rodr guez and the
other claimants. See Rodr guez v. Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc., ___ _________ ____________________________
882 F. Supp. 1202 (D.P.R. 1995). On appeal, this court affirmed
the district court's judgment. See Rodr guez v. Prudential-Bache ___ _________ ________________
Sec., Inc., 72 F.3d 234 (1st Cir. 1995). Prudential then paid __________
Rodr guez his arbitration award.
In her subsequent motion for partial summary judgment,
Morales argued that since the arbitrators rendered an award in
favor of Rodr guez, and since her claims were based on his
wrongful termination, the arbitration panel adjudicated all the
facts necessary to find Prudential liable to Morales on her
claims. Thus, according to appellant, the only issue remaining
was the extent of damages and the corresponding compensation.
The district court dismissed Morales' complaint and granted
Prudential's cross motion for summary judgment. Morales appeals.
We find the district court's well-reasoned opinion
persuasive, and we affirm on the grounds stated therein. See ___
Rodr guez v. Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc., No. 90-2659 (D.P.R. _________ ____________________________
January 23, 1997). We write only to emphasize that Morales'
claims arose directly from Prudential's termination of Rodr guez'
employment in violation of Law 80, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 29,
185a, et seq., which provides an exclusive remedy for an employee ______ _________
who has been discharged without just cause. As the district
court noted, "[h]er claims are directly derived, and inextricably
intertwined with the employment dispute between Prudential and
her husband, Jos Rodr guez." Consequently, her attempts to
-3-
assert an independent cause of action for damages under Puerto
Rico's general tort statute, Art. 1802 of the Civil Code of
Puerto Rico, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, 5141, are unavailing.
Morales might have had a viable cause of action if she
alleged tortious acts by Prudential independent of her husband's
dismissal. In Pujol v. Shearson/American Express, Inc., 829 F.2d _____ _______________________________
1201 (1st Cir. 1987), a husband and wife, individually and as
representatives of their conjugal partnership, appealed a
district court's denial of their motion for partial summary
judgment against an employer. This court held that an
arbitration award under the husband's employment contract stood
as res judicata with respect to the husband and conjugal
partnership's claims, which were already arbitrated or could have
been raised at the arbitration proceeding. See id. at 1206-08. ___ __
However, the Pujol court allowed the wife "to sue for _____
direct injury to her property and herself." 829 F.2d at 1209.
This court observed that "[i]f [the wife] can prove that personal
papers, documents and property belonging to her, as distinct from ________________
her husband or the conjugal partnership, were subjected to the _________________________________________
treatment alleged, then she has stated a cause of action." Id. __
at 1208 (emphasis added). In the instant case, any injury
alleged by Morales resulted from Prudential's conduct toward her
husband rather than from any acts committed directly against her.
Ultimately, Morales has failed to assert any independent factual
basis for recovery distinct from her husband or the conjugal
partnership.
-4-
Costs to be assessed against appellant.
Affirmed. Affirmed ________
-5-
Reference
- Status
- Published