Maldonado-Vinas v. National Western Life Ins. Co.

303 F.R.D. 177 (D.P.R. 2014)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

On April 30, 2011, Carlos submitted $1,467,500 with an annuity application to D. Carlos named his brother, Francisco, as the annuity's beneficiary. This annuity was signed by Marangelis Rivera, who represented herself as D's agent but who did not have an agent's license in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. On May 2, 2011, Carlos submitted another $1,467,500 with a second annuity application to D. This second annuity identified Carlos as the annuitant and Francisco as the owner and beneficiary. Francisco Iglesias did not sign the second annuity application. Carlos Iglesias died on November 2, 2011. Ps are Carlo's widow and two surviving sons. Ps first learned of the two annuities through discovery in a Puerto Rico court proceeding. Francisco is a resident of Madrid, Spain, and a citizen of Spain. D paid Francisco his claim benefits for both annuities on February 23, 2012, and March 13, 2012, sending checks for $1,643,600 and $1,500,000 directly to Francisco's address in Spain. On March 11, 2014, Ps filed a complaint against D seeking $2,935,000, which is the amount Carlos paid for the two annuities. Ps attack the first annuity as void because it was signed by a person fraudulently claiming to be a licensed agent, in violation of Puerto Rico law and the second because it was never signed by Francisco. D moved to dismiss under 12(b)(7) as Francisco is a required party and the joinder of Francisco Thus pursuant to 19(b), the Court should dismiss the action because the action cannot proceed 'in equity and good conscience' in Francisco Iglesias's absence. Thus, pursuant to 19(b), the Court should dismiss the action because the action cannot proceed 'in equity and good conscience' in Francisco Iglesias's absence. is not feasible because he is a citizen and resident of Spain who does not maintain regular contacts with Puerto Rico. Thus, pursuant to 19(b), the Court should dismiss the action because the action cannot proceed 'in equity and good conscience' in Francisco Iglesias's absence.