Ramos v. Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito de Lajas (In re Ramos)

660 B.R. 343

IN RE: Jason Acosta RAMOS and Limarie Mojica Vazquez, Debtors.

Jason Acosta Ramos and Limarie Mojica Vazquez, Plaintiffs, v. Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito de Lajas, Defendant.

CASE NO. 21-00002 MAG

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico

Signed April 4, 2024

Gilbert Joseph Lopez Delgado, Lopez Delgado Law Office, Guaynabo, PR, for Defendant.

Harold A. Frye Maldonado, San Juan, PR, Rosa E. Hilerio Echevarria, Aguadilla, PR, Carlos M. Vargas Muniz, Mayaguez, PR, for Plaintiffs.

OPINION AND ORDER

María de los Ángeles González, United States Bankruptcy Judge

Pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment brought by defendant Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito de Lajas ("Defendant") in an adversary proceeding for violation of the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) and of the discharge injunction under 11 U.S.C. § 524(a)(2) filed by plaintiffs Jason Acosta Ramos and Limarie Mojica Vazquez ("Plaintiffs"). (Adv. Dkt. # 36.) As explained below, Plaintiffs claim that Defendant violated the automatic stay and the discharge injunction by filing the informative form 480.6A ("Form 480.6A") with the Puerto Rico Treasury Department (the "Treasury Department") instead of form 480.6D ("Form 480.6D"), which resulted in the assessment of a tax debt for the 2020 tax year in the amount of $575.18. Defendant requests summary judgment finding that such action does not constitute a violation of the discharge injunction and for the case to be dismissed. Plaintiffs oppose alleging that there are issues of material facts that preclude the entry of summary judgment, and that Defendant is not entitled to the remedy requested as a matter of law. (Adv. Dkt. ## 48, 49.) For the reasons stated herein, the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant is granted and the case is dismissed.

I. JURISDICTION

This court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 157(a), L. Civ. R. 83K(a), and the General Order of Referral of Title 11 Proceedings to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Puerto Rico, dated July 19, 1984 (Torruella, C.J.). This is a core proceeding in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 157(b).

II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code on January 4, 2021, which was docketed as case number 21-00002. (Bankr. Dkt. # 1.)

Plaintiffs included Defendant as a creditor in schedule D with a claim in the amount of $12,478.71 secured by shares with a value of $3,000.00. (Bankr. Dkt. # 11, p. 12.) On February 2, 2021, Plaintiffs filed an amended schedule E/F in which they included Defendant as an unsecured creditor with a claim of $10,164.57 for consumer credit. (Bankr. Dkt. # 18, p. 2.) Defendant did not file a proof of claim. (Bankr. Claims Register.)

On February 2, 2021, the Chapter 7 Trustee filed a report of no distribution. (Bankr. Dkt. # 22.)

On April 9, 2021, the court entered the order of discharge. On even date, an order discharging the trustee and closing the estate was also entered. (Bankr. Dkt. ## 27, 28.)

On December 3, 2021, Plaintiffs filed a motion to reopen the case which the court granted. (Bankr. Dkt. ## 31, 33.)

On December 30, 2021, Plaintiffs commenced the captioned adversary proceeding against Defendant requesting the court the following: (1) to order Defendant to withdraw Form 480.6A filed with the Treasury Department after the entry of Plaintiffs' discharge; (2) find Defendant in contempt of court for violating 11 U.S.C. §§ 362 and 524; and (3) award Plaintiffs damages, costs, and attorney's fees pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 362(k) and 105(a). (Adv. Dkt. # 1.)

On April 20, 2022, Defendant filed its answer to complaint. (Adv. Dkt. # 13.)

On July 28, 2023, Defendant moved for summary judgment against Plaintiffs and filed a separate statement of uncontested facts (the "Motion for Summary Judgment"). (Adv. Dkt. ## 36, 37.) And on October 3, 2023, Plaintiffs opposed the entry of summary judgment also filing a separate statement of uncontested facts. (Adv. Dkt. ## 48, 49.)

On November 22, 2023, Defendant filed a reply to Plaintiffs' opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment. (Adv. Dkt. # 63.)

III. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

"In bankruptcy, summary judgment is governed in the first instance by Bankruptcy Rule 7056." Cousins Int'l Food, Corp. v. Vidal, 565 B.R. 450, 461 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 2017) (citing Desmond v. Varrasso (In re Varrasso), 37 F.3d 760, 762 (1st Cir. 1994)). Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7056 incorporates Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, which provides that a court shall grant summary judgment when the record shows that "there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). "[A]n issue is 'genuine' if the record permits a rational factfinder to resolve that issue in favor of either party." Jarvis v. Vill. Gun Shop, Inc., 805 F.3d 1, 7 (1st Cir. 2015). "[A] fact is 'material' 'if its existence or nonexistence has the potential to change the outcome of the suit.' " Id. (citing Borges ex rel. S.M.B.W. v. Serrano-Isern, 605 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2010)).

In assessing a motion for summary judgment, the court "must view the entire record in the light most hospitable to the party opposing summary judgment, indulging in all reasonable inferences in that party's favor." Podiatrist Ass'n, Inc. v. La Cruz Azul de P.R., Inc., 332 F.3d 6, 13 (1st Cir. 2003) (citing Griggs-Ryan v. Smith, 904 F.2d 112, 115 (1st Cir. 1990)). "A swing of the summary judgment axe can be averted if the nonmoving party adduces competent evidence demonstrating the existence of a genuine dispute about a material fact." Theriault v. Genesis HealthCare LLC, 890 F.3d 342, 348 (1st Cir. 2018). "If the non-movant fails to make the required showing on such an issue and the issue is a dispositive one, summary judgment is appropriate." Harrington v. Simmons (In re Simmons), 810 F.3d 852, 857 (1st Cir. 2016). A nonmoving party "cannot defeat a summary-judgment motion with 'conclusory allegations' or 'unsupported speculation.' " Villeneuve v. Avon Prods., 919 F.3d 40, 54 (1st Cir. 2019).

In the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, Local Civil Rule 56 sets forth the requirements for summary judgment. A party moving for summary judgment must file, annexed to its motion, "a separate, short and concise statement of the material facts, set forth in numbered paragraphs, as to which the moving party contends there is no genuine issue of material fact to be tried." L. Civ. R. 56(b). Moreover, "[e]ach asserted fact in the statement shall be supported by a record citation." Id. Under Local Civil Rule 56(c), the party opposing summary judgment must "submit with its oppositions a separate, short, and concise statement of material facts," admitting, denying, or qualifying the facts by reference to each numbered paragraph with references to the record. L. Civ. R. 56(c). Moreover, "[f]acts contained in a supporting or opposing statement of material facts, if supported by record citations as required by this rule, shall be deemed admitted unless properly controverted." L. Civ. R. 56(e). The court has "no independent duty to search or consider any part of the record not specifically referenced in the parties' separate statement of facts." Id. "[F]ailure to present a statement of disputed facts, embroidered with specific citations to the record, justifies the court's deeming the facts presented in the movant's statement of undisputed facts admitted." Cosme-Rosado v. Serrano-Rodriguez, 360 F.3d 42, 45 (1st Cir. 2004) (citing Ruiz Rivera v. Riley, 209 F.3d 24, 28 (1st Cir. 2000)).

IV. UNCONTESTED FACTS

After reviewing Defendant's statement of uncontested facts ("D SUF") (Adv. Dkt. # 37) and Plaintiff's opposition thereto (Adv. Dkt. ## 48, 49), the court finds that the following material facts are uncontested pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and L. Civ. R. 56, made applicable to these proceedings by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7056 and P.R. LBR 1001-1(b) and (d), as found in the record of this case.

On January 4, 2021, Plaintiffs filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. (Bankr. Dkt. #1.)

Defendant was included in Plaintiffs' schedule D as "COOP AC LAKAS" with a claim in the amount of $12,478.71, of which $3,000.00 were secured by shares. (D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 37, p. 2, ¶ 3; Bankr. Dkt. # 11, p. 12.)

Later, in amended schedule E/F, Defendant was included with an unsecured claim in the amount of $10,164.57 for consumer credit. (Bankr. Dkt. # 18, p. 2.)

On April 9, 2021, the court entered Plaintiffs' discharge. (Bankr. Dkt. # 27.)

On April 11, 2021, notice of Plaintiffs' discharge was sent to Defendant to the following address: 14 Jose Toro Basora, Lajas PR 00667-2032. (D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 37, p. 2, ¶ 7; Bankr. Dkt. # 29; Plaintiffs' opposition to D SUF, Adv. Dkt. # 49, p. 1, ¶ 1 admitting Defendant's uncontested fact.)

Defendant is required by Puerto Rico law to file with the Treasury Department Form 480.6D to inform debts that are discharged in a bankruptcy case. (D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 37, pp. 2-3, ¶ 8; D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 37, Exhibit 1, p. 6, ¶ 5; D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 37, Exhibit 2, pp. 9-17; Plaintiffs' opposition to D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 49, p. 1, ¶ 1 admitting Defendant's uncontested fact.)

Defendant erroneously filed Form 480.6A instead of Form 480.6D with the Treasury Department. (D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 37, p. 3, ¶ 9; D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 37, Exhibit 3, p. 19; Plaintiff's opposition to D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 48, Exhibit II, p. 14; Plaintiffs' opposition to D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 49, p. 2, ¶ 4 admitting Defendant's uncontested fact of the filing but not admitting that it was filed by mistake because Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of such statement.)

Form 480.6A is used to inform the Treasury Department of condoned debts. (D SUF at Adv. Dkt. # 37, p. 3, ¶ 10; D SUF at Adv....