Boateng v. Interamerican University, CIV. 96-1060CCC.
| Decision Date | 09 December 1998 |
| Docket Number | No. CIV. 96-1060CCC.,CIV. 96-1060CCC. |
| Citation | 36 F.Supp.2d 60 |
| Parties | Dr. Peter BOATENG, Plaintiff, v. INTERAMERICAN UNIVERSITY, Dr. Jose R. Gonzalez, individually and in his official capacity as President of Interamerican University; Agnes Mojica, individually and in her official capacity as Chancellor of Interamerican University-San Germán campus; Zulma Quiñones, individually and in her official capacity as Dean of Division of Professional Programs of Interamerican University-San Germán campus; Juan Anibal Aponte, individually and in his official capacity as Dean of Studies of Interamerican University-San Germán campus; Ramon Ayalacuervos, individually and in his official capacity as President of the Board of Trustees of the Interamerican University, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Puerto Rico |
William Nadal-Colón, Yauco, PR, for Plaintiff.
Alberto G. Estrella, San Juan, PR, for Defendants.
This action, brought against the Interamerican University and several of its officials, alleges violations of Title VII 42 U.S.C. § 2000e based upon discrimination due to race and nationality, breach of contract, and other causes under Puerto Rico law.1 Plaintiff Peter Boateng is a black man from Ghana who was employed by the university as a professor of accounting at its San Germán, Puerto Rico campus.
The case is now before us on the defendants Motion to Dismiss2 (docket entry 80) based upon the fact that a parallel action filed in the courts of Puerto Rico, IPE-95-0122, Dr. Peter Boateng v. Universidad Interamericana de Puerto Rico, et al., involving the same parties, issues and claims as this case, was adjudicated on the merits in defendants' favor. Plaintiff's Reply to Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 81) raises as its only point in opposition that the period for appeal from the denial of his Motion for Reconsideration had not expired and, therefore, the judgment was not final, as the defendants claimed. On July 10, 1998, the defendants filed a Supplementary Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 87), informing the Court that the Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Regional Circuit, issued a Judgment dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction since it was filed after the term to appeal had expired.
The only argument presented in plaintiff's half-page opposition to the supplementary motion (docket entry 88) is that .
The factual allegations of the complaint before us are as follows. Plaintiff was hired by the University in 1988. During his sixth year he was evaluated for tenure. On June 12, 1995 Boateng received a letter from the chancellor of the university stating that his tenure had been denied and a contract not contemplated by the rules of the institution entitled "extended probationary period" was going to be issued for one additional year. Plaintiff alleges that this decision by the officials of the university was based solely on his nationality, race, and color. After Boateng filed anti-discrimination charges, the university president allegedly issued a letter expressly requesting "rigorous evaluations" of plaintiff's work during the year. He further alleges that charges of plagiarism brought against him were also done in retaliation.
The causes of action set out in the complaint include unlawful employment practices in violation of Section 2000e-2(a), 3(a) and (b); violation of plaintiff's right to privacy under the Constitution of Puerto Rico and its anti-discrimination law(Law 100), a tort claim; a breach of contract claim, and a claim of defamation.
Federal Courts must honor the res judicata effects of state court judgments. Felix Davis v. Vieques Air Link, 892 F.2d 1122, 1124-1125 (1st Cir.1990); Stitzer v. University of Puerto Rico, 617 F.Supp. 1246 (D.C.Puerto Rico, 1985).
Res judicata, codified under Puerto Rico law in Article 1204 of the Civil Code, 31 LPRA 3343, requires the fulfillment of three criteria. In Bolker v. Superior Court; Sosa, Int., 82 P.R.R. 785, the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico determined that the prior judgment must have been final, must have been rendered by a court with proper jurisdiction, and must have been on the merits.3 Id. at 792, 798.
As stated above, the complaint alleges the discriminatory denial of tenure to the plaintiff on the basis of his nationality, race and color. Although no specific contract is identified anywhere in the record, we surmise that the contract claim arises from an employment contract between the parties.
The causes of action found in the Commonwealth court complaint contained in several conclusory paragraphs:
9. The decision to refuse Dr. Boateng's tenure is based exclusively on his nationality, race and color....
...
11. The actions of the officers of the IAU violated the regulatory provisions which govern this University....
...
13. The discriminatory actions of the defendants have forced Dr. Boateng to accept a probationary contract for the next year, in clear violation of the laws of Puerto Rico and the U.S.A. and the regulations of the IAU because, if he does not do so, the IAU has threatened to fire him, which would entail his having to leave the island.
As can be seen, the complaints arise from the same set of facts, and allege the same violations.
The decision on which defendant bases its motion is contained in a document entitled Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Aponte Diaz v. Navieras Puerto Rico, Inc., No. CIV. 98-1917(HL).
...v. Tribunal Superior y Sosa, Interventores, 82 D.P.R. 785, 792-93, 798 (1961); Felix Davis, 892 F.2d at 1124; Boateng v. Interamerican University, 36 F.Supp.2d 60, 62 (D.P.R.1998). In the present case, the four factors are met. Aponte has once litigated his state claims and failed. None of ......
-
Marcano Arroyo v. K-Mart, Inc., Civil No.97-1986(HL).
...v. Tribunal Superior y Sosa, Interventores, 82 D.P.R. 785, 792-93, 798 (1961); Felix Davis, 892 F.2d at 1124; Boateng v. Interamerican University, 36 F.Supp.2d 60, 62 (D.P.R.1998). In the present case, Marcano does not claim that the Superior Court judgment is not final or that the court la......
-
Boateng v. InterAmerican Univ. Inc.
...(Title VII)." The district court rejected this argument and entered judgment in favor of the University. See Boateng v. InterAmerican Univ., 36 F. Supp. 2d 60 (D.P.R. 1998). This appeal II. ANALYSIS We review de novo orders granting summary judgment. See Garside v. Osco Drug, Inc., 895 F.2d......