Case Name: Successors of José Martínez v. Tomás Dávila & Co.
Court: Supreme Court of Puerto Rico
Jurisdiction: Puerto Rico
Decision Date: 1911-12-04
Citations: 17 P.R. 1068
Docket Number: No. 745
Parties: Successors of José Martínez v. Tomás Dávila & Co.
Judges: Chief Justice Hernández and Justices MacLeary, Wolf, del Toro and Aldrey concurred.
Reporter: Puerto Rico Reports
Volume: 17
Pages: 1068–1069

Head Matter:
Successors of José Martínez v. Tomás Dávila & Co.
Appeal from the District Court of San Juan, Section 1.
MotioN to dismiss appeal.
No. 745.
Decided December 4, 1911.
Dismissal of Appeal — Omission of Findings of Fact from Transcript of Eecord — Judgment Boll. — The omission of a copy of the findings of fact from the transcript of the record does not constitute a defect which affects the jurisdiction of the court or which can serve as grounds for dismissing the appeal, the interested party having the right to obtain its inclusion by means of a motion in case such findings of fact have been made.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Messrs. Bosch and Soto for appellant.
Mr. Cayetano Coll y Cuchí for adverse party.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Wolf
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is the second motion made in this case that the appeal he dismissed. The only ground now alleged is that the apel-lant has failed to send up the decisión as required by section 233 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 233 of the Code -of Civil Procedure, in English, alludes to a copy of the "findings of the court," and this phrase is translated into Spanish as decisión. The failure to include such findings of facts is not a jurisdictional matter, but merely a diminution of the record, and if the appellee desired to have any findings of facts that may actually have been made by the court below transmitted to this court, he could have suggested such diminution of the record; if it was the duty of the court to make such findings and he failed to do so, such failure was not ground for the dismissal of the appeal; hut some other remedy was in reach of the appellant.
The motion to dismiss the appeal must be overruled.
Motion overruled.
Chief Justice Hernández and Justices MacLeary, Wolf, del Toro and Aldrey concurred.