Case Digest (G.R. No. 114928)
Facts:
The case involves The Andresons Group, Inc. as the petitioner and the spouses Willie A. Denate and Myrna Lo Denate as the respondents. On November 18, 1991, Willie Denate entered into an agency agreement with The Andresons Group, Inc., whereby he acted as a commission agent for the sale of distilled spirits in Davao City and surrounding areas. Subsequently, on the same day, the private respondents initiated a civil action for collection against The Andresons Group, claiming an amount of P882,107.95 for unpaid commissions in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Davao City, which was assigned the docket number Civil Case No. 21, 061-91. A month later, on December 19, 1991, The Andresons Group filed its own complaint against the Denates in the RTC of Kalookan City, seeking remedy for the alleged outstanding debt of P1,618,467.98 after accounting for commissions owed to Willie Denate.On February 5, 1992, the Denates filed a Motion to Dismiss the Kalookan case on the basis of lis pen
Case Digest (G.R. No. 114928)
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Petitioner: The Andresons Group, Inc.
- Private Respondents: Spouses Willie A. Denate and Myrna Lo Denate.
- Relationship: Willie Denate acted as a commission agent for petitioner in the sale of distilled spirits (wines and liquors) in Davao City, three provinces in Davao, and North Cotabato.
- Separate Actions Filed
- Davao City Case
- On November 18, 1991, private respondent Willie Denate filed a civil action for collection of money in the RTC of Davao City (Civil Case No. 21, 061-91).
- Claim: Denate sought P882,107.95 in commissions, alleging petitioner’s failure to pay.
- Kalookan City Case
- On December 19, 1991, petitioner filed its own complaint in the RTC of Kalookan City, Branch 22 (Civil Case No. C-15214).
- Claim: Petitioner sought collection of P1,618,467.98 (after deductions for commissions and remittances) along with damages and a preliminary attachment.
- Motion to Dismiss and Proceedings in the Kalookan RTC
- On February 5, 1992, private respondents filed a Motion to Dismiss the Kalookan case on the ground of lis pendens, contending that another similar action was pending in Davao City.
- Petitioner responded on February 14, 1992, arguing that the RTC in Davao had not yet acquired jurisdiction over it, noting that service of summons had not been effectuated in the Davao case.
- On April 24, 1992, the RTC of Kalookan City ruled against the Motion to Dismiss, finding:
- Jurisdiction in the Kalookan case was established since defendants had already been served (as of January 8, 1992).
- The pending Davao action had not acquired jurisdiction because summons had not yet been served there (as of April 21, 1992).
- Subsequently, on May 29, 1992, private respondents filed a Motion for Reconsideration, which was denied by the RTC on July 1, 1992.
- The case was then elevated to the Court of Appeals, which set aside the RTC’s order, leading to the present petition before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- The Central Question
- Should the action pending in the Kalookan RTC be dismissed on the ground of lis pendens?
- Does the filing of a complaint—without the prior service of summons in the other action—suffice to trigger the defense of lis pendens?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)