Case Digest (G.R. No. 103882)
Facts:
On December 24, 1997, Boston Equity Resources, Inc. (petitioner) filed a complaint for sum of money with a prayer for preliminary attachment against spouses Manuel and Lolita Toledo in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 24. Lolita Toledo (respondent) answered on March 19, 1998, and on May 7, 1998, she filed a motion to admit an amended answer stating that her husband Manuel had died on July 13, 1995, as shown by his death certificate. Petitioner then sought the names of Manuel’s heirs, which respondent provided, and on January 18, 2000, petitioner moved to substitute Manuel with his children, a motion granted on October 9, 2000. Pre-trial was conducted and on July 18, 2001, the RTC set the hearing dates. During trial, petitioner presented its evidence; reception of the respondent’s evidence was deferred and later canceled. On September 24, 2004 the court allowed fifteen days to file a demurrer, but on October 7, 2004, respondent instead filed a motion to dismiss alCase Digest (G.R. No. 103882)
Facts:
- Filing of Complaint and Initial Pleadings
- On December 24, 1997, Boston Equity Resources, Inc. (petitioner) filed a complaint for sum of money with prayer for preliminary attachment against spouses Manuel and Lolita Toledo.
- Respondent Lolita Toledo filed her answer on March 19, 1998 and on May 7, 1998 moved for leave to admit an amended answer, alleging her husband Manuel Toledo had died on July 13, 1995 (per death certificate).
- Joinder of Heirs and Substitution
- Petitioner moved on August 5, 1999 to require disclosure of Manuel’s heirs; Lolita complied on October 11, 1999, supplying names and addresses.
- On January 18, 2000, petitioner filed a motion to substitute Manuel by his children; the trial court granted substitution on October 9, 2000.
- Trial Proceedings
- Pre-trial order issued July 18, 2001 setting hearing dates; petitioner presented evidence and exhibits were admitted.
- Reception of respondent’s evidence cancelled by agreement on May 26, 2004; respondent was given 15 days from September 24, 2004 to file a demurrer to evidence.
- Motion to Dismiss and Trial Court Orders
- On October 7, 2004, respondent filed a motion to dismiss on grounds of non-impleader of indispensable party, lack of personal jurisdiction over Manuel, erroneous substitution, and Section 6, Rule 86 applicability.
- The RTC denied the motion on November 8, 2004 as filed out of time (Rule 16, Sec. 1) and denied reconsideration on December 22, 2004 citing estoppel by laches.
- Court of Appeals Proceedings
- Respondent petitioned the CA for certiorari; on February 28, 2006, the CA granted relief, finding grave abuse of discretion in the RTC’s denial of respondent’s motion to dismiss, and reversed the RTC orders.
- The CA denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration on August 1, 2006. Petitioner filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari with the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Procedural Remedy and Timeliness
- Whether a special civil action for certiorari was the proper remedy to assail the interlocutory order denying the motion to dismiss.
- Whether respondent’s motion to dismiss was filed beyond the allowable period under Rule 16, Sec. 1.
- Jurisdiction over the Person
- Whether respondent is estopped from questioning personal jurisdiction over deceased Manuel after years of participation.
- Whether the trial court ever acquired jurisdiction over Manuel’s person in light of his prior death.
- Indispensable Party and Misjoinder
- Whether the estate of Manuel Toledo is an indispensable party to petitioner’s sum-of-money claim.
- Whether Manuel’s inclusion as defendant constituted mere misjoinder not warranting dismissal.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)