Case Digest (G.R. No. 45720)
Facts:
Ventura Guzman v. Alfredo Catolico and Simeon Ramos, G.R. No. L-45720. December 29, 1937. The Supreme Court En Banc, Villa-Real, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Ventura Guzman was sued by respondent Alfredo Catolico in the Court of First Instance of Isabela on March 8, 1937, for recovery of attorney’s fees. In the complaint Catolico also prayed for the issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment against the properties adjudicated to Guzman in special proceedings No. 179 of that court. Attached to the complaint was an affidavit in which Catolico swore that he had prepared and read the complaint and that “all the allegations thereof are certain and true, to the best of my knowledge and belief.”
Acting on the complaint and affidavit, Judge Simeon Ramos, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Isabela, on March 10, 1937 ordered the issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment, conditioned upon filing the required bond. On April 15, 1937, Guzman moved for cancellation of the writ, contending that the complaint and affidavit failed to allege (1) that there was no other sufficient security for the claim sought to be enforced and (2) that the amount due the plaintiff above all legal set-offs and counterclaims equaled the sum for which attachment was granted; Guzman also argued the affidavit was based on mere information and belief.
The respondent judge denied Guzman’s motion by order of July 10, 1937. Guzman then filed a petition with the Supreme Court (seeking certiorari relief), contesting the legality and validit...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the omission in the complaint or affidavit of allegations that there is no other sufficient security for the claim and that the amount due above all legal set-offs or counterclaims equals the sum sought render the writ of preliminary attachment void for want of jurisdiction under Section 426 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
- Was the affidavit attached to the complaint fatally defective because it stated the allegations were “to the best of my knowledge and ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)