Case Digest (A.C. No. 3319)
Facts:
In April 2004, Teofilo B. Adolfo (petitioner) filed Civil Case No. MAN-4821 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 55, Mandaue City, seeking a judicial separation of property from his estranged wife, Fe T. Adolfo (nee Tudtud), over Lot 1087-A-2-E (3,652 sqm) in Brgy. Cabancalan, Mandaue City, Cebu. He alleged co-ownership of the lot acquired through conjugal funds and prayed for its partition or sale, plus attorney’s fees and costs. In her Answer with counterclaim, respondent asserted sole ownership of the lot as her paraphernal property inherited from her mother and detailed a chain of transfers ending in Transfer Certificate of Title No. 18368 in her name. A related suit, Civil Case No. MAN-2683, filed in 1996 by respondent’s sister and brother-in-law for partition of a 300 sqm portion of the same lot, resulted in an RTC Decision dated May 15, 2002, declaring the entire lot as conjugal property and nullifying a 1988 sale, awarding damages. Petitioner incorporated certifCase Digest (A.C. No. 3319)
Facts:
- Marriage and Acquisition of Property
- Teofilo B. Adolfo and Fe T. Adolfo (née Tudtud) married on November 26, 1966; one common child.
- During marriage, they acquired Lot 1087-A-2-E (3,652 sqm) in Mandaue City with conjugal funds, titled under TCT No. 18368.
- Respondent’s Claim of Paraphernal Ownership
- Chain of title: Petronila Tudtud (mother) quitclaimed portion to Fe in 1967 (TCT 17216-5415); subsequent sale to brother (TCT 17833-5515), mortgage to DBP (TCT 18231), sale to Garcias (TCT 18266), and resale back to Fe in 1983 (TCT 18368) with annotation “married to Teofilo Adolfo.”
- Fe alleged the lot as her paraphernal property—brought into the marriage, acquired by redemption, and purchased with her exclusive funds—and that Teofilo’s name was merely to describe her civil status.
- Civil Case No. MAN-2683 (1996 Partition Suit)
- Filed by Fe’s sister and brother-in-law for partition of a 300 sqm portion of Lot 1087-A-2-E.
- RTC Branch 55 Decision (May 15, 2002): ruled the lot conjugal; nullified 1988 deed of sale for lack of Teofilo’s consent; awarded damages.
- CA Decision (May 30, 2007) in CA-G.R. CV No. 78971: reversed RTC, declared the lot paraphernal; decision became final June 23, 2007.
- Civil Case No. MAN-4821 (2004 Judicial Separation of Property)
- Teofilo’s petition for judicial separation of property under Art. 135(6), Family Code, to partition Lot 1087-A-2-E; prayed for attorney’s fees and costs.
- Fe’s Answer with counterclaim: denied conjugal interest; detailed marital history, chain of title, and prayed for damages and costs.
- During pretrial, Teofilo marked and requested admission of documents and Fe’s admission in MAN-2683 that the lot is conjugal. Fe did not respond to the Request for Admission (Rule 26, § 2).
- Teofilo moved for Judgment on the Pleadings (treated as summary judgment) on September 5, 2005. RTC Branch 55 granted it by Order of October 2, 2006: held the lot conjugal, ordered equal partition after allocating the child’s legitime.
- Fe appealed via CA-G.R. CV No. 01783. CA Decision (October 6, 2009) reversed and set aside the RTC Order; Motion for Reconsideration denied (March 2, 2012).
Issues:
- Whether the RTC correctly treated Teofilo’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as one for summary judgment and granted it despite pending appeal in MAN-2683.
- Whether Fe’s failure to respond to the Request for Admission and her prior admission in MAN-2683 conclusively established the lot as conjugal property.
- Whether the RTC could take judicial notice of its own decision in MAN-2683 while that decision was under appeal.
- Whether the final CA Decision in CA-G.R. CV No. 78971 declaring the lot paraphernal bars Teofilo’s claim to partition it as conjugal.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)