THE CONJUGAL SOCIETY COMPOSED OF JUVENAL ROSA, PEDRO AND AMADOR DE ROSA, ROSARIO, JUVENAL ROSA, PEDRO AND AMADOR DE ROSA, ROSARIO, INDIVIDUALLY, PLAINTIFFS, APPELLANTS,
v.
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL., DEFENDANTS, APPELLEES

1st Cir. | 1981-04-01
No. 80-1686
Before COFFIN, Chief Judge, CAMPBELL and BOWNES, Circuit Judges.
646 F.2d 688 United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (1981) Negative Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint based on the inapplicability of 12 U.S.C. § 632, as a prior ruling by this court established its continued applicability.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their complaint for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that 12 U.S.C. § 632 applied to their banking transactions. The…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal from the district court’s dismissal of their amended complaint for lack of jurisdiction.* The sole issue they have raised is that the district court erred in deciding that 12 U.S.C. § 632 was no longer applicable to banking transactions involving federally incorporated organizations in Puerto Rico. After their appeal was brought, this court, in accord with the position here advanced by appellants, held in another case that section 632 remained applicable. First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Puerto Rico v. Ruiz De Jesus, 644 F. 2d 910 (1st Cir. 1981). In that case, we expressly overruled the district court’s decision here on the section 632 question. Id., at 914 n.7.

Notwithstanding our ruling in First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Puerto Rico, appellee argues that we should still affirm the district court’s dismissal on the grounds that plaintiffs’ amended complaint does not state a claim “[ajrising out of transactions involving ... banking....” 12 U.S.C. § 632. That issue, however, was never decided by the district court, see 497 F.Supp. at 47, and it may also require some further factual development. We think the district court must be given an opportunity to pass on the matter and to proceed further or not as it may determine.

We accordingly vacate the district court’s judgment dismissing the amended complaint for lack of jurisdiction on grounds that 12 U.S.C. § 632 is not applicable in Puerto Rico. We remand the case to the district court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

So ordered.

*

The district court’s opinion is published at 497 F.Supp. 41 (D.P.R.I979).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw