Puerto Rico
Pierluisi, AAFAF Call for Stay of Act 7 Litigation Pending Confirmation, Insist Lawsuit ‘Poses No Real-World Controversy’
Wed 08/25/2021 20:12 PM
Relevant Document:
Motion to Stay
The executive branch defendants - Governor Pedro Pierluisi and the Puerto Rico Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory Authority - have asked the Title III court to stay the PROMESA oversight board’s adversary proceeding challenging Act 7, which seeks to implement broad debt/pension reform, until after confirmation of the seventh amended joint plan of adjustment “or, at least, until the Board affirmatively takes a position concerning two bills the Governor has filed with the intent of replacing Act 7.”
The executive branch defendants say that they “readily concede that the Act is significantly inconsistent with the 2021 Fiscal Plan, have submitted a certification to that effect under PROMESA section 204(a), and represented that they have not taken any steps to implement the Act and have no intention to do so.” The motion states that the court’s time and resources are far better spent on the upcoming confirmation hearing than on this adversary proceeding, “which poses no real-world controversy.”
Further, the executive branch defendants point out that on July 9, the Governor filed two bills - HR 886 and HR 887 - that provide possible alternatives to Act 7. These proposed bills were shared with the Oversight Board in an effort to engage and avoid this unnecessary litigation, the filing adds. However, the motion states that to date, the government has not received any formal answer from the Oversight Board as to the merits of these proposed bills.
The motion argues that a stay of litigation would advance judicial economy by allowing the parties to engage in talks concerning the proposed bills, which could ultimately render this case moot. A stay would also allow the parties to “focus on negotiations and cooperation” regarding plan-related procedures and prepare for the confirmation hearing, which could “narrow the issues before the Court in both the confirmation hearing and this adversary proceeding.”
The executive branch defendants filed a notice related to the motion, as well as a motion for expedited briefing asking the court to set a deadline of Aug. 30 at 12:59 p.m. ET for responses to the motion to stay and a deadline of Sept. 1 at 11:59 p.m. ET for the executive branch defendants’ replies.
Motion to Stay
The executive branch defendants - Governor Pedro Pierluisi and the Puerto Rico Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory Authority - have asked the Title III court to stay the PROMESA oversight board’s adversary proceeding challenging Act 7, which seeks to implement broad debt/pension reform, until after confirmation of the seventh amended joint plan of adjustment “or, at least, until the Board affirmatively takes a position concerning two bills the Governor has filed with the intent of replacing Act 7.”
The executive branch defendants say that they “readily concede that the Act is significantly inconsistent with the 2021 Fiscal Plan, have submitted a certification to that effect under PROMESA section 204(a), and represented that they have not taken any steps to implement the Act and have no intention to do so.” The motion states that the court’s time and resources are far better spent on the upcoming confirmation hearing than on this adversary proceeding, “which poses no real-world controversy.”
Further, the executive branch defendants point out that on July 9, the Governor filed two bills - HR 886 and HR 887 - that provide possible alternatives to Act 7. These proposed bills were shared with the Oversight Board in an effort to engage and avoid this unnecessary litigation, the filing adds. However, the motion states that to date, the government has not received any formal answer from the Oversight Board as to the merits of these proposed bills.
The motion argues that a stay of litigation would advance judicial economy by allowing the parties to engage in talks concerning the proposed bills, which could ultimately render this case moot. A stay would also allow the parties to “focus on negotiations and cooperation” regarding plan-related procedures and prepare for the confirmation hearing, which could “narrow the issues before the Court in both the confirmation hearing and this adversary proceeding.”
The executive branch defendants filed a notice related to the motion, as well as a motion for expedited briefing asking the court to set a deadline of Aug. 30 at 12:59 p.m. ET for responses to the motion to stay and a deadline of Sept. 1 at 11:59 p.m. ET for the executive branch defendants’ replies.
This article is an example of the content you may receive if you subscribe to a product of Reorg Research, Inc. or one of its affiliates (collectively, “Reorg”). The information contained herein should not be construed as legal, investment, accounting or other professional services advice on any subject. Reorg, its affiliates, officers, directors, partners and employees expressly disclaim all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all the contents of this publication. Copyright © 2024 Reorg Research, Inc. All rights reserved.