A current federal resolution out of Puerto Rico ought to be a magnet for insurers and public adjusters. In Mapfre Praico Insurance coverage Firm v. Reynolds, 1 the courtroom dismissed an insurer’s negligence claims towards a public adjuster and his firms, not as a result of the allegations lacked benefit, however as a result of the claims had been filed too late.
And never simply late—too late by the unforgiving normal of Puerto Rico’s one-year statute of limitations for tort claims.
After Hurricane Maria, the Puerto Rico Freeway and Transportation Authority offered a considerable declare to its insurer, MAPFRE. The general public adjuster concerned allegedly inflated damages, misrepresented licensing credentials, and pushed the declare towards coverage limits far exceeding what MAPFRE believed was owed. After years of litigation, the underlying declare settled for a fraction of the demanded quantity. MAPFRE then circled and sued the adjuster and his firms for negligence, arguing that their conduct brought about inflated litigation prices and pointless publicity.
The general public adjuster defendants argued that MAPFRE knew of the alleged misconduct properly earlier than one yr previous to submitting go well with. They pointed to MAPFRE’s personal allegations about data of licensing points, consciousness of inflated estimates, and even prior litigation positions asserting misconduct. Briefly, they argued that MAPFRE had lengthy been on discover of a possible declare and that MAPFRE did not file go well with throughout the one-year limitations interval.
MAPFRE responded with a extra nuanced argument. It claimed that its reason for motion didn’t accrue till the underlying litigation led to December 2023, when it might lastly quantify its damages and perceive the complete affect of the alleged misconduct. It relied on doctrines usually utilized in authorized malpractice circumstances, the place claims usually don’t accrue till a closing judgment is entered.
The courtroom discovered that beneath Puerto Rico legislation, a tort declare accrues when the injured social gathering is aware of, or ought to know, of the harm and the id of the one who brought about it. Not when damages are totally calculated. The courtroom emphasised a precept {that a} plaintiff can not watch for damages to achieve their “closing diploma of growth” earlier than submitting go well with. As soon as you might be on discover of a possible declare, the clock begins ticking.
On this case, the courtroom discovered that MAPFRE had that discover properly earlier than the one-year interval. Whether or not the set off date was Could 2022, July 2023, or November 2023, it didn’t matter. Every of these dates fell outdoors the permissible window. The grievance, filed in December 2024, was just too late.
What makes this resolution notably instructive is what the courtroom rejected. It rejected the concept that negligent misrepresentation claims ought to comply with the accrual guidelines of authorized malpractice. It rejected the notion that damages have to be totally quantified earlier than the statute begins to run.
There’s a broader lesson right here for each insurers and policyholders. Within the warmth of advanced claims litigation, events usually give attention to successful the underlying dispute and assume that associated claims may be sorted out later. This case is a reminder that the legislation doesn’t at all times enable that luxurious. Statutes of limitation function independently of litigation technique, and they don’t pause just because a case is ongoing.
For public adjusters, the choice underscores the scrutiny their work can face lengthy after a declare is submitted. Claims of misconduct may be with out benefit however could value dearly to defend. I counsel public adjusters carry vital malpractice protection. For insurers, it highlights the significance of appearing promptly when misconduct is suspected.
The courtroom didn’t say MAPFRE’s claims lacked substance or had been meritless. It stated MAPFRE waited too lengthy to convey them. In litigation, well timed submitting go well with is step one.
Thought For The Day
“The legislation helps the vigilant, earlier than those that sleep on their rights.”
— Latin maxim, Vigilantibus non dormientibus aequitas subvenit
1 Mapfre Praico Ins. Co. v. Reynolds, No. 3:24-cv-01557 (D.P.R. Mar. 26, 2026). See additionally, Defendant’s Movement to Dismiss, and Plaintiff’s Opposition to the Movement to Dismiss.