Case Digest (G.R. No. 232189)
Facts:
Alex Raul B. Blay v. Cynthia B. Bana, G.R. No. 232189, March 07, 2018, Supreme Court Second Division, Perlas-Bernabe, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner is Alex Raul B. Blay and respondent is Cynthia B. Bana; the case concerns whether respondent’s counterclaim should remain for adjudication in the same trial court after petitioner’s motion to withdraw his complaint.On September 17, 2014 petitioner filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Pasay City, Branch 109, Civil Case No. R-PSY-14-17714-CV, a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage (petition dated April 11, 2014) alleging psychological incapacity under Art. 36, Family Code. Respondent filed an Answer with Compulsory Counterclaim dated December 5, 2014.
Petitioner later filed a Motion to Withdraw his petition dated March 11, 2015. Respondent filed a comment/opposition dated March 26, 2015 invoking Section 2, Rule 17, Rules of Court and prayed that her counterclaim be declared “remaining for independent adjudication.” Petitioner replied (April 29, 2015), contending respondent failed to manifest within the 15-day period from notice of the Motion to Withdraw; petitioner asserted that respondent’s counsel received notice on March 11, 2015 and thus could only have until March 26, 2015 to manifest, while respondent’s required manifestation was filed only on March 30, 2015.
In an Order dated May 29, 2015 the RTC granted petitioner’s Motion to Withdraw and declared respondent’s counterclaim “as remaining for independent adjudication,” giving petitioner 15 days to file an answer to the counterclaim. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration (filed June 22, 2015) was denied by RTC order dated March 3, 2016. Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari to the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 146138; the CA, in a Decision dated February 23, 2017, dismissed the petition for lack of merit, finding no grave abuse of discretion by the RTC and construing Section 2, Rule 17 to mean the dismissal was limited to the complaint where a counterclaim was already pleaded. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration before the CA was denied in a Resolu...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in upholding the RTC Orders that declared respondent’s counterclaim to remain for independent adjudication in the same action despite respondent’s alleged failure to manifest within fifteen (15) days from notice of petitioner’s Motion to Withdraw under Section 2, Rule 17 ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)