Cruz v. Molina Lugo
Case Date: 03/10/1993
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 92-2083
|
March 10, 1993 United States Court of Appeals United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit For the First Circuit ____________________ No. 92-2083 JORGE CRUZ, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. NORBERTO MOLINA LUGO, Defendant, Appellee. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge] ___________________ ____________________ Before Stahl, Circuit Judge, _____________ Aldrich and Coffin, Senior Circuit Judges. _____________________ ____________________ Raul Barrera Morales for appellant. ____________________ Federico Lora Lopez for appellee. ___________________ ____________________ ____________________ Per Curiam. In this appeal, plaintiff seeks review __________ of a carefully and fully developed decision of the district court rendered after a bench trial. After ruling that plaintiff's lease had been violated by defendant's illegal exclusion of plaintiff from the premises, the court found that plaintiff had suffered no damages as a result of that occurrence, but that defendant had suffered damages in the amount of sixty dollars for past due rent and seven hundred dollars for exterminating services made necessary because of plaintiff's inadequate housekeeping. The court also found that certain other claims brought by plaintiff were lacking in any substance. Plaintiff's objections on appeal are based on his challenges to factual determinations of the court, which, of course, are accepted unless demonstrated to be "clearly erroneous." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a). Having carefully ___ reviewed the record on appeal and the objections raised by plaintiff, we are not persuaded that the court clearly erred in making the determinations at issue. Accordingly, we affirm based on the well-reasoned district court opinion. Affirmed. Double costs to appellee. Affirmed Double costs to appellee ________ ________________________ -2- 2 |