Case Digest (G.R. No. 176949)
Facts:
The case involves Lourdes K. Mendoza, the respondent, who is the sole proprietor of Highett Steel Fabricators, and Asian Construction and Development Corporation, the petitioner. On January 6, 2000, Mendoza filed a complaint for a sum of money against the petitioner in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City, Branch 126, which was docketed as Civil Case No. C-19100. Mendoza alleged that between August 7, 1997, and March 4, 1998, the petitioner purchased various fabricated steel materials and supplies from Highett, amounting to P1,206,177.00, exclusive of interests. Despite repeated demands for payment, the petitioner failed to settle the amount, prompting Mendoza to engage legal counsel. The petitioner sought a bill of particulars, arguing that the complaint lacked supporting documents such as purchase orders and invoices. However, the RTC denied this motion on March 1, 2000. The petitioner then filed an Answer with Counterclaim, denying liability and asserting a lack...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 176949)
Facts:
Parties Involved:
- Petitioner: Asian Construction and Development Corporation (a domestic corporation).
- Respondent: Lourdes K. Mendoza (sole proprietor of Highett Steel Fabricators).
Background of the Case:
- On January 6, 2000, respondent filed a Complaint for a sum of money against petitioner before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City, Branch 126.
- Respondent alleged that from August 7, 1997, to March 4, 1998, petitioner purchased fabricated steel materials and supplies from Highett amounting to P1,206,177.00, exclusive of interest.
- Despite repeated demands, petitioner failed or refused to pay, prompting respondent to engage legal services.
Procedural History:
- Petitioner filed a Motion for a Bill of Particulars, arguing that the complaint lacked copies of purchase orders and invoices. The RTC denied the motion.
- Petitioner then filed an Answer with Counterclaim, denying liability and asserting lack of cause of action.
- During trial, respondent presented two witnesses: Artemio Tejero (Highett’s salesman) and Arvin Cheng (Highett’s General Manager).
- Petitioner’s presentation of evidence was waived due to repeated non-appearance of petitioner and its counsel.
RTC Decision:
- On December 1, 2000, the RTC ruled in favor of respondent, ordering petitioner to pay:
- P1,206,177.00 (principal amount).
- P244,288.59 (accrued interest as of August 31, 1999, plus 12% annual interest until full payment).
- P150,000.00 (attorney’s fees).
- Costs of suit.
CA Decision:
- The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC decision but modified the reckoning point for the computation of 1% monthly interest to 30 days from the date of each delivery.
Issue:
- Whether the charge invoices are actionable documents.
- Whether the delivery of the alleged materials was duly proven.
- Whether respondent is entitled to attorney’s fees.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Final Disposition
The Supreme Court affirmed the CA decision with modification, deleting the award of attorney’s fees.