G.R. No. 180730 - Gonzalez vs. Lacap

Plaintiff Estrella G. Medrano and defendant Zenaida B. Gonzalez are sisters and daughters of the late Spouses Conrado B. Gonzalez and Miguela B. Gonzalez.
The family acquired real properties using conjugal funds, which later became central to the dispute.
Specific transactions include:

On January 10, 1953, the parents purchased two parcels of land covered by TCT No. 19593/T-372; possession was evidenced by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 31206 issued in the name of defendant Zenaida B. Gonzalez.
On August 14, 1957, the parents acquired additional lots from the same title, subsequently registered in defendant Zenaida B. Gonzalez’s name via TCT Nos. 48477 and 48478.

The intention during these transactions was that Zenaida would serve as trustee, while the real beneficial interest remained with the parents, so that the properties continued to serve as the ancestral family home.

On May 19, 2006, plaintiff Medrano filed the complaint in Civil Case No. 06-115100 against defendant.
Plaintiff alleged that:

The subject properties, despite being registered in Zenaida’s name, were owned by their deceased parents.
She was entitled, by operation of law as a successor-in-interest, to 1/7 of the entire property.
The residential house built on the property was the ancestral home of the family and a site used by various siblings during visits.

Declaration that 1/7 of the property (including the improvements) belonged to her.
Partition of the properties in question.
Reconveyance and transfer of her 1/7 share to her name.
Payment of attorney’s fees, moral damages, exemplary damages, and litigation expenses.

In her Answer, defendant denied the allegations and asserted exclusive ownership over the properties.
Additional defenses included:

Allegation that plaintiff had admitted in a Deed of Extra-Judicial Settlement that the only remaining property of their parents did not include the registered properties.
Claims that the right of action had prescribed, that the complaint was one for reconveyance, and that plaintiff was barred by laches.

On September 2, 2006, defendant executed a Deed of Assignment transferring the subject properties to her elder brother, Carlos B. Gonzalez.
On October 12, 2006, defendant filed a Motion for Substitution on account of her financial constraints and medical needs, requesting that her brother be substituted as the defendant; the RTC granted this motion on December 14, 2006.

The Pre-Trial Order dated June 21, 2007, identified several critical issues including:

Whether the subject properties were owned by the parents.
Whether the plaintiff was entitled to her 1/7 share of the properties along with the improvements.
Whether partition or reconveyance of the properties should be ordered.
Whether the damages prayed for were warranted.
The authenticity of the Deed of Assignment and its relation to an ongoing falsification case.
Questions surrounding prescription, laches, and if the complaint amounted to a collateral attack on defendant’s title.
The possibility of forum shopping by the plaintiff.
Whether defendant was entitled to her counterclaim.

On July 9, 2007, defendant filed a Manifestation and Motion for a preliminary hearing to address defenses such as prescription, laches, estoppel, and forum shopping.
The RTC rendered an Order on August 28, 2007, denying the motion, stating that:

The prescription issue was intertwined with the nature of the action (partition versus reconveyance) and required full trial evaluation.
The factual and evidentiary issues identified could only be properly resolved through a complete trial on the merits.

Defendant’s subsequent request for reconsideration was similarly denied in the RTC Order dated October 16, 2007.

Whether the subject properties, though registered in defendant’s name, were indeed the properties of the deceased parents.
Whether plaintiff, as a successor-in-interest, is entitled to a 1/7 share of the properties and related improvements.

Whether the complaint is properly characterized as an action for partition or as one for reconveyance, given the multiple forms of relief sought.
The implications of this characterization on issues such as prescription and laches.

Whether defenses such as prescription, laches, estoppel, and forum shopping should preclude the plaintiff’s claims.
The admissibility and propriety of relying on these defenses at the pre-trial stage instead of during a full trial.

Whether the Deed of Assignment executed by defendant in favor of Carlos B. Gonzalez is a falsified document.
Whether the pendency of an accompanying falsification case impairs the rights or claims of the parties involved.