Breach of contract in Puerto Rico

A breach of contract under Puerto Rico law requires evidence as follows:

“

A cognizable claim for breach of contract under "Puerto Rico law requires sufficient allegations of a breach of the contractual terms and that the breach caused an identifiable harm." Almeida-León, 993 F.3d at 13; Soc. de Gananciales v. Velez & Asoc., 98 TSPR 54, 145 P.R. Dec. 508, 1998 Juris P.R. No. 55 (1998). When disputes arise as to contract interpretation, the 1930 Civil Code of Puerto Rico (applicable at the time of the proceedings below) explicitly calls for construing "the meaning of [the contract's] terms." Borschow Hosp. & Med. Supplies, Inc. v. Cesar Castillo Inc., 96 F.3d 10, 15 (1st Cir. 1996) (quoting Hopgood v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, 839 F. Supp. 98, 104 (D.P.R. 1993), aff'd, 36 F.3d 1089 (1st Cir. 1994)). Thus, Article 1233 provides that "[i]f the terms of a contract are clear and leave no doubt as to the intentions of the contracting parties, the literal sense of its stipulations shall be observed. If the words should appear contrary to the evident intention of the contracting parties, the intention shall prevail." P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 3471. Courts are barred from considering extrinsic evidence in a written contract where the terms are clear and unambiguous. Borschow Hosp., 96 F.3d at 15-16; Vulcan Tools of P.R. v. Makita U.S.A., Inc., 23 F.3d 564, 567 (1st Cir. 1994); Marina Indus., Inc. v. Brown Boveri Corp., 14 P.R. Offic. Trans. 86, 114 P.R. Dec. 64, 72 (1983).

”

Triangle Cayman Asset Co. v. LG & AC, Corp., 52 F.4th 24, 32 (1st Cir. 2022).

"[A] breach of contract claim arises 'when the breach of a contractual obligation causes harm to any of the contracting parties.'" Almeida-León v. WM Capital Mgmt., 993 F.3d 1, 13 (1st Cir. 2021) (quoting Mattei Nazario v. Vélez & Asociados, 98 TSPR 54, 1998 TSPR 54, 145 P.R. Dec. 508, 1998 Juris P.R. 55 (1998)).