Case Digest (G.R. No. 78490) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Fortunato Gomez and Aurora Gomez v. Court of Appeals, Adolfo Trocino and Mariano Trocino, G.R. No. 127692, decided March 10, 2004, the spouses Fortunato and Aurora Gomez (petitioners) sued the heirs of Jesus J. Trocino, Sr., including respondents Adolfo and Mariano Trocino and their mother Caridad Trocino, in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu City (Branch 10) in Civil Case No. CEB-11103. Filed on December 16, 1991, the complaint for specific performance and/or rescission alleged that in 1975 Jesus and Caridad Trocino mortgaged two parcels of land to Dr. Clarence Yujuico, which were foreclosed and sold at auction on July 11, 1988. Before the redemption period lapsed, the Trocinos sold the same properties to petitioners on December 12, 1989, who then redeemed the title but the Trocinos refused to convey. Summons were served on January 8, 1992 through Caridad Trocino allegedly on behalf of all defendants. Respondents answered on January 27, 1992, verified only by Caridad. A Case Digest (G.R. No. 78490) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Case Background
- Petitioners Fortunato and Aurora Gomez filed on December 16, 1991 in RTC-Cebu (Branch 10), Civil Case No. CEB-11103, for specific performance and/or rescission of sale of two parcels (TCT Nos. 10616, 31856) against respondents Adolfo and Mariano Trocino and their mother Caridad Trocino, heirs of Jesus J. Trocino, Sr.
- Allegations: In 1975 spouses Jesus and Caridad Trocino mortgaged said parcels to Dr. Clarence Yujuico; foreclosure and public auction on July 11, 1988; before redemption expired, spouses Trocino sold properties to petitioners on December 12, 1989, who redeemed them; spouses Trocino then refused to convey.
- Trial Court Proceedings
- Summons Service: Process Server’s return dated January 10, 1992 indicated summons and complaint served on defendants (including Adolfo, Mariano) through Caridad Trocino at Maria Cristina Extension, Cebu City, without detailing efforts for personal service.
- Answer and Verification: Defendants filed Answer on January 27, 1992 through Atty. Expedito P. Bugarin; only Caridad verified.
- RTC Decision (March 1993): Ordered defendants to execute Deed of Sale and deliver duplicate titles within ten days or rescind sale and refund ₱500,000 plus 12% interest; awarded moral and exemplary damages (₱50,000; ₱20,000), attorney’s fees (₱40,000), litigation expenses (₱10,000).
- Title Declaration (August 29, 1995): RTC declared original Transfer Certificates of Title null and void; directed Register of Deeds to issue new titles in petitioners’ names.
- CA Annulment Petition (March 13, 1996): Adolfo and Mariano Trocino filed in CA (CA-G.R. SP No. 40067) for annulment of RTC judgment, alleging lack of valid summons service, non-residency, no authorization for counsel. CA on September 30, 1996 annulled and enjoined title cancellations; reconsideration denied.
- Supreme Court Proceedings
- Petition for Review: Petitioners assailed CA’s ruling under Rule 45, assigning errors on CA’s findings re: prior knowledge, nature of action, service of summons, futile litigation, and CA’s application in favor of Caridad.
- Resolution: Supreme Court denied the petition; affirmed the Court of Appeals decision; imposed costs against petitioners.
Issues:
- Was summons validly served on respondents Adolfo and Mariano Trocino to confer personal jurisdiction upon the RTC?
- Is the action for specific performance and/or rescission in rem, in personam, or quasi in rem, and what service rules apply?
- Did substituted service through Caridad Trocino and the representation by Atty. Expedito P. Bugarin constitute a valid waiver or confer jurisdiction?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)