Casin vs. Caluag

G.R. No. L-1939
A quo warranto action challenges Teodoro Regalado's mayoral eligibility due to alleged disloyalty; the Court of First Instance retains jurisdiction despite a pending treason case.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-1939)

Facts:

Sixto Casin v. Hermogenes Caluag, G.R. No. L-1939. April 19, 1948, the Supreme Court En Banc, Feria, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Sixto Casin filed a special civil action in quo warranto seeking to oust Teodoro Regalado from the office of Mayor of Malinao, Albay, alleging Regalado’s ineligibility under Section 172 of the Revised Election Code by reason of disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines (then commonly called the Commonwealth). The quo warranto petition charged substantially the same acts of disloyalty that formed the basis of a pending criminal prosecution for treason against Regalado in the People’s Court.

Respondent Teodoro Regalado moved to dismiss the quo warranto on the ground that the Court of First Instance of Albay lacked jurisdiction because the People’s Court had already acquired jurisdiction over the same subject-matter by reason of the pending treason prosecution. The trial judge, Hermogenes Caluag, granted the motion and dismissed petitioner’s quo warranto.

Petitioner then instituted a special civil action for certiorari and mandamus in the Supreme Court (in substance a mandamus) against Judge Caluag to compel him to take cognizance of and try the quo warranto. The petition asserted that the judge had failed to perform a duty imposed by law (to proceed in a case within his court’s jurisdiction) and that appe...(Pro-only)

Issues:

  • Is mandamus (by way of a special civil action for certiorari and mandamus) the appropriate remedy to compel the judge to take cognizance of and try the quo warranto when he dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction?
  • Did the Court of First Instance of Albay have jurisdiction to try the quo warranto despite the pending criminal prosecution for treason in the People’s Court?
  • May a quo warranto proceeding declare a person disloyal and thereby ineligible under Section 172 of the Revised Election Code on the basis of a preponderance of evidence even thoug...(Pro-only)

Ruling:

  • (Pro-only)

Ratio:

  • (Pro-only)

Doctrine:

  • (Pro-only)

Philippine legal research, made clearer
AI-generated research aids. Verify with Full Text.