Title
Supreme Court
Dela Cruz-Lanuza vs. Lanuza
Case
G.R. No. 242362
Decision Date
Apr 17, 2024
The Supreme Court declared the marriage of Leonora and Alfredo void due to Alfredo's psychological incapacity to fulfill marital obligations, stemming from long-term neglect and infidelity.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 242362)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Marriage and Family Background
    • Petitioner Leonora O. Dela Cruz-Lanuza married private respondent Alfredo M. Lanuza, Jr. in June 1984.
    • They have four children together.
    • Although the marriage contract states a marriage license from Imus, Cavite, Leonora did not secure or appear for any such license.
  • Allegations and Marital Breakdown
    • Initially smooth married life later deteriorated due to Alfredo's behavioral changes.
    • Alfredo often came home late or early morning after nights out, neglected family duties, and did not provide financial support.
    • Alfredo treated Leonora not as his wife but as an ordinary occupant of the house.
    • Alfredo engaged in illicit affairs and married other women in 1994 and 2000.
    • Leonora separated from Alfredo in 1994.
    • A complaint for bigamy was filed but archived due to Alfredo's unavailability; he was dismissed from the police service after going AWOL.
  • Psychological Evaluation and Evidence
    • Based on legal advice, Leonora underwent a psychological evaluation by Clinical Psychologist Noel N. Ison.
    • Ison interviewed Leonora, her sister, and daughter but could not assess Alfredo directly.
    • Using collateral information, Ison diagnosed Alfredo with narcissistic personality disorder with borderline personality traits.
    • Ison testified that such disorder renders an individual psychologically incapacitated to perform essential marital obligations.
  • Trial Court Proceedings
    • The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petition due to insufficient proof that Alfredo's subsequent marriages were valid and insufficient evidence of psychological incapacity.
    • The court doubted the sufficiency and specificity of Ison's testimony.
    • It ruled Alfredo's infidelity and behavior showed no durable psychological incapacity existing prior to marriage.
    • The petition for nullity and the motion for reconsideration were denied.
  • Court of Appeals Proceedings
    • Leonora filed a Petition for Review under Rule 42; the Court of Appeals dismissed it as the wrong remedy, stating a Notice of Appeal was proper.
    • The motion for reconsideration was denied due to procedural grounds and lack of demonstration of meritorious issue.
  • Supreme Court Proceedings
    • Leonora filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court.
    • Alfredo failed to file comments or respond to Court orders.
    • The Office of the Solicitor General defended the Court of Appeals' dismissal and contested sufficiency of evidence for psychological incapacity.
    • The Office questioned the credibility of Ison's findings due to lack of personal examination of Alfredo.

Issues:

  • Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing Leonora's appeal on procedural grounds.
  • Whether the evidence presented is sufficient to declare the marriage void for psychological incapacity.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.