
    Soriano v. Ubarri.
    Appeal from the District Court of San Juan.
    No. 95.
    Decided March 25, 1904.
    Action in Forma Pauperis. — In order that the benefits of prosecuting an action in forma pauperis after the institution thereof may be granted, it is necessary for the plaintiff to prove fully that he has become poor after having brought his action.
    
      Id. — Held, in view of the facts of this case, That the plaintiff is entitled, to litigate as a poor person, under article 24 of the Law of Civil Procedure, providing that this privilege shall not be granted him unless he proves that he has beeome poor after the commencement of the action.
    STATEMENT OE TI-IE CASE.
    A hearing was had of the petition filed in the District Court of San Juan by Isaac Soriano, requesting permission to prosecute as a poor person his suit against Pablo Ubarri Iramategui, which, case is pending before us on appeal taken by the petitioner from the decision rendered by the district court, which reads as follows:
    “Judgment. — In the city of San Juan, Porto Rico, June 29, 1903. An oral and public hearing was had of a petition filed by Isaac So-riano, represented by Attorney Luis Freyre Barbosa, requesting permission to prosecute in forma pauperis his suit against Pablo Ubarri Iramategui, likewise represented by Attorney Hilario Cuevillas Her-nández. ■
    “Isaac Soriano filed a petition requesting permission to prosecute as a poor person his action against-Pablo Ubarri for ejecting him from the piece of land he had occupied, which was the only property he possessed. The facts, as set forth by. him, were as follows: He was born and resides in Santurce, where he has always lived; is married to Juana Cortijo, is seventy years of age, owing to which he can exercise no profession or trade, and dwells in a hut at the place called '‘Seboruco/ in Santurce, without paying rent, neither he nor his wife and children possessing any property or income of any kind. He bases his right on article 14 of the Law of Civil Procedure, and the legal provision whereby persons are to be declared poor whose income, from whatever source derived, does not exceed double the wages received by a laborer in the locality, and that having been ejected from the land he occupied, which was the only thing he possessed, he has. become poor after having brought his action.
    “Joining to his answer a communication from the Treasurer to-the effect that there was no record in his office of any payment on account of taxes, either directly or indirectly, by Isaac Soriano, during the last and the current fiscal year, Pablo Ubarri opposed the request, for permission to sue as a poor person, inasmuch as the petitioner-had shortly before instituted proceedings against him in the San Francisco municipal court and prosecuted the same as a person of means, and he was not aware of anything occurring subsequently whereby the petitioner had 'been reduced to poverty. Ubarri stated that he was willing to abide by the result of the evidence brought forward, which answer was approved by the Fiscal at the request of the petitioner.
    “Upon the taking of evidence, the following was submitted by the petitioner: 1. Certificate of the municipal judge of San Francisco to the effect that Ubarri !s action of unlawful detainer against Soriano was instituted under date of June 17, 1901; that the decision of the municipal court is dated August 22, and the judgment of the District Court of San Juan, September 18 of said year, the dispossession proceedings bearing date of October 31, 1901; 2. Certificate from the clerk of this court to the effect that the summary proceedings were instituted June 19, 1901; 3. Testimony of two witnesses who declared that Soriano lived upon the proceeds of two hundred cuerdas, upon which there were a hut, cocoanuts, wood and other things, which products he ceased to enjoy upon being evicted from the estate by reason of the unlawful detainer proceedings instituted by Pablo Ubarri; that Soriano is seventy years of age, and, for this reason, unable to work, as to which latter particular one of the witnesses did not testify.
    “On behalf of the defendant Ubarri the following evidence was offered: 1. Certificate of the clerk of the municipal court to the effect that Soriano had requested a declaration of insolvency in the action of unlawful detainer instituted against him by Ubarri, and the matter having been heard, judgment was rendered July 18, 1901, dismissing the same with costs, from which decision no appeal was taken by Soriano; that in the action of unlawful detainer instituted by Ubarri there is on record a complaint based upon the fact that he bad been employed by Ubarri to take care of an estate, and having been discharged and thirty days allowed him to quit he had refused to vacate the hut occupied by him without paying rent; that on August 22 of aforesaid year the municipal court had decided the case against Isaac Soriano, who was given eight days to vacate the hut, under admonition of being ejected therefrom in case of failure to do so; and that an appeal having been taken from said decision the same was affirmed by the district court; 2. Certificate from the clerk of this court of the aforesaid judgment of September 18, 1901, affirming the one appealed from with costs.
    “After the taking of evidence counsel for Ubarri requested that the trial be annulled, because requisite 3 of article 28 of the Law of Civil Procedure had not been complied with in the complaint, which request having been overruled by the court on the grounds stated in the record, said counsel entered a protest. The hearing was proceeded with, the parties presenting such arguments as were deemed pertinent.
    “Presiding Judge Juan Morera Martínez prepared the opinion of the court.
    “Upon an examination of the evidence, taken together, it does not appear to have been demonstrated that the benefits allowed by the law to persons who apply for permission to sue or be sued in forma pauperis should be conferred upon Isaac Soriano. The claim pursued by him is such as arises out of his eviction from lands which he says he occupied, and from the record it appears that it was in an action of unlawful detainer that he requested the privilege of litigating as a poor person, which request was overruled after hearing the incidental issue.
    “For this reason, under his third point of law, he argued that in this case it should be considered as having been proven that he was reduced to poverty after the action had been commenced, which point is not borne out inasmuch as it does not appear that he was the owner of the land vacated, proving such to be the fact in an .action of unlawful detainer.
    “We hold that we should declare and do declare that the request for permission to litigate as a poor person, made by Isaac Soriano, ■should be rejected, with costs against the petitioner; Pablo Ubarri being released from responsibility under the complaint.
    “Thus by this our judgment do we pronounce, order and sign. Juan Morera Martínez, Frank H. Richmond, José Tous Soto.”
    
      From this judgment the representative of the plaintiff, Isaac Soriano, took an appeal, which was allowed for review and for a stay of proceedings, with citation of the parties. The latter having appeared before this Supreme Court, and the appeal having been conducted under the proper procedure, a day was set for the hearing, counsel for both parties being present, as also the Fiscal of the Supreme Court, who joined in the appeal.
    
      Mr. Freyre (Luis), for appellant.
    
      Mr. Texidor, for respondent.
    
      Mr. del Toro, Fiscal, for the People.
   Mr. Chief Justice Quiñoues,

after making the above statement of facts, delivered the opinion of the court.

The findings of fact of the judgment appealed from are accepted.

- Although according to article 24 of the Law of Civil Procedure, when the plaintiff has not requested permission to prosecute as a poor person before bringing ids action, should he request it subsequently, it cannot be granted unless he duly proves that- he has become poor after having brought his action, the latter is precisely the case with the plaintiff Isaac Soriano, inasmuch as from the evidence taken it appears that after the summary proceedings instituted by him against Pablo Ubarri Iramategui, an action of unlawful detainer was brought by the latter against him, and he was evicted from the rural estate, with whose products he had been supporting himself and his family; and it being furthermore proven by the testimony of witnesses given at the oral trial that he has no other property or income, and is an old man of over seventy years of age, who cannot support himself with the product of his personal labor, he is perfectly entitled to the privilege of litigating without charge.

In view of articles 13, 15 and 24 of the Law of Civil Procedure, we adjudge that we should reverse and do reverse the judgment appealed from, and declare the plaintiff Isaac Soriano poor for the purpose of litigating with Pablo Ubarri Iramategui, without special imposition of costs.

Justices Hernández, Figueras and MacLeary concurred.

Mr. Justice Sulzbacher did not sit at the hearing of this case.  