Case Digest (G.R. No. L-34897)
Facts:
Raul Arellano v. Court of First Instance of Sorsogon, Branch I, and Santiago Uy-Barreta, G.R. No. L-34897, July 15, 1975, Supreme Court Second Division, Barredo, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Raul Arellano was a defendant in Civil Case No. 2167 filed by private respondent Santiago Uy-Barreta in the Court of First Instance of Sorsogon on February 4, 1967, seeking reconveyance and damages over a parcel of land. After service, Arellano filed on May 5, 1967 a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action and, pursuant to Rule 25, served written interrogatories on Barreta (received May 9, 1967). Barreta did not serve answers to those interrogatories within the various periods subsequently given by the trial court.
The interlocutory incident lingered: after long delays the court set the matter for hearing in February 1969 and repeatedly afforded Barreta opportunities to file oppositions or answers which he failed to submit. On August 19, 1969 the trial court, concluding Barreta had not complied with the rules on discovery and the periods imposed by the court, dismissed the complaint as to Arellano for failure to answer interrogatories. Barreta moved for reinclusion of Arellano (December 16, 1969); that motion was denied on February 16, 1970.
Barreta, with new counsel, filed a motion to set aside the dismissal in January 1971 which the trial court denied on February 23, 1971. On March 22, 1971 Barreta moved for and obtained leave to file an amended complaint; the court admitted the amended complaint on March 31, 1971 thereby rejoining Arellano as a defendant. Arellano moved to set aside that admission; the trial court denied reconsideration on May 24, 1971, and again on January 12 and February 11, 1972, reiterating that the August 19, 1969 dismissal did not constitute res judicata because, in the trial court’s view, it was not an adjudication on the merits and because of questions over the propriety of the interrogatories under Rule 24–25.
Arellano sought relief in the Supreme Court by petition for certiorari to annul and set aside the t...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the trial court’s dismissal of August 19, 1969 of the complaint as to Raul Arellano legally issued and final?
- Did the trial court commit grave abuse of discretion in admitting the amended complaint and rejoining Arellano despite the prior dismissal (i.e., were the challenged orders of March 31 and May 24, 1971 and January 12 an...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)