Title
Buan vs. Feliciano
Case
G.R. No. L-28995
Decision Date
Dec 19, 1970
Petitioner and respondent died, rendering the certiorari and prohibition case moot; Court dismissed petition, citing no live controversy.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28995)

Facts:

  1. Parties Involved:

    • Petitioner: Bienvenido P. Buan
    • Respondents: Nicolas Y. Feliciano and Hon. Arturo B. Santos, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Tarlac, Branch II
  2. Nature of the Case:

    • A certiorari and prohibition proceeding was filed by petitioner Bienvenido P. Buan on May 10, 1968.
  3. Subject Matter:

    • The petitioner sought to declare that respondent Judge lacked jurisdiction to entertain or act on a counter-protest and motion to dismiss filed by respondent Feliciano.
    • The petitioner also sought a writ of certiorari to annul the order of respondent Judge dated February 19, 1968, which struck out the answer of respondent Feliciano but refused to dismiss his counter-protest.
    • Additionally, the petitioner requested a writ of prohibition to prevent respondent Judge from further entertaining or acting on the counter-protest.
  4. Procedural History:

    • On May 14, 1968, the Court required respondents to answer and issued a writ of preliminary injunction.
    • On June 11, 1968, respondents filed their answer, sustaining the jurisdiction of Judge Santos and seeking the dismissal of the petition.
    • On July 24, 1968, petitioner’s counsel filed a motion to postpone, citing the death of respondent Nicolas Y. Feliciano on July 10, 1968.
    • On October 16, 1970, the Court issued a resolution noting that petitioner Bienvenido P. Buan had also died and required counsel to show cause why the case should not be dismissed as moot.
    • On November 23, 1970, petitioner’s counsel filed a motion to dismiss, stating that since both petitioner and respondent Feliciano were deceased, the case should be dismissed as moot.

Issue:

  1. Whether the case should be dismissed as moot due to the death of both the petitioner and the respondent.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.