Case Digest (G.R. No. 150865)
Facts:
Art Fuentebella, Park-in-Charge, and Rolling Hills Memorial Park, Inc. v. Darlica Castro, G.R. No. 150865, June 30, 2006, Supreme Court Second Division, Azcuna, J., writing for the Court. Petitioners are Art Fuentebella (sued in his capacity as Park-in-Charge) and Rolling Hills Memorial Park, Inc.; respondent is Darlica Castro.Respondent, the widow of Freddie Castro, engaged the funeral services of Rolling Hills Memorial Park for her husband's interment on September 27, 1997. During burial the casket did not fit the vault; the casket was left exposed to the sun and measured with a spade, which prompted respondent to demand explanation from the cemetery management; no reply was given. On March 16, 1998, respondent filed a complaint for damages in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) of Bacolod City seeking moral and exemplary damages, attorney’s fees and costs. Petitioners moved to dismiss on grounds that the MTCC lacked jurisdiction because claimed damages exceeded P200,000. Respondent later moved to withdraw the complaint, and the MTCC granted the withdrawal on June 24, 1998.
On April 15, 1999, respondent filed a similar complaint with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Negros Occidental, attaching a Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping pursuant to Rule 7, Section 5 of the Rules of Court. Petitioners moved to dismiss before the RTC, contending the certification was false because of the earlier MTCC filing. On January 3, 2000, the RTC denied petitioners’ motion to dismiss and, on July 9, 2001, denied their motion for reconsideration, holding that a false certification constitutes indirect contempt and not automatic dismissal.
Petitioners then filed a petition for certiorari with preliminary injunction/restraining order before the Court of Appeals (CA). In a resolution dated September 27, 2001, the CA dismissed the petition on the ground that the Verification and Certification was signed by Lourdes Pomperada without showing that she was duly authorized to sign on behalf of petitioners. After petitioners submitted a Secretary’s Certificate and moved for reconsideration, the CA again denied relief on November 20, 2001, noting that there was still no showing that Pomperada was authorized to represent co-petitioner Fuentebella.
Petitioners elevated the matter to the Supreme Court by a petition for review under Rul...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in dismissing the petition for certiorari on the ground that the Verification and Certification against forum shopping was signed by a person without shown authority?
- Did the Regional Trial Court commit grave abuse of discretion by refusing to dismiss respondent’s complaint for submitting a false certifica...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)