Case Digest (G.R. No. 143736)
Facts:
Ofelia Herrera-Felix, represented by Jovita Herrera-Sena, petitioner, vs. Court of Appeals, and St. Joseph Resources Development, Inc., G.R. No. 143736, August 11, 2004, Supreme Court Second Division, Callejo, Sr., J., writing for the Court.On March 11, 1993 St. Joseph Resources Development, Inc. filed Civil Case No. 1967 in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malabon, Branch 73, against the Spouses Restituto and Ofelia Felix, seeking payment for deliveries of assorted fish from November–December 1992 totaling P1,516,181.00 and claiming an unpaid balance of P1,132,065.50; the complaint sought a writ of preliminary attachment and other reliefs. The RTC issued the writ of preliminary attachment (bond posted March 26, 1993) and the sheriff levied personal properties; the sheriff’s return noted that Ofelia Herrera-Felix was allegedly out of the country and that service at the residence had been effected through her sister, Ma. Luisa Herrera.
Through counsel Atty. Celestino C. Juan, the Felix spouses filed a motion for extension of time to answer on April 5, 1993, which the RTC granted on April 6, 1993; no answer was later filed. Plaintiff moved to declare the spouses in default (April 23, 1993); the court declared them in default (May 13, 1993). The RTC, Presiding Judge Amanda Valera Cabigao, rendered judgment for plaintiff on August 11, 1993 ordering defendants to pay P1,077,565.50 plus interest, attorneys’ fees and costs. Copies of the decision were mailed by registered mail; the spouses’ copy was returned unclaimed but counsel received his copy. The judgment became final and executory after no appeal was filed; a writ of execution issued and the sheriff sold several personal properties at public auction (Certificate of Sale executed August 14, 1995).
On September 13, 1996 petitioner Ofelia Herrera-Felix, through her sister Jovita Herrera-Sena, filed a petition under Rule 47 with the Court of Appeals (CA) to annul the RTC judgment, the writ of execution, and the sheriff’s sale, alleging (1) substituted service on Ma. Luisa Herrera was invalid because she was only a visitor, and (2) the judgment never became final and executory because petitioner was not served a copy of the decision. The CA, in a decision penned by Associate Justice Ramon A. Barcelona (retired), with Associate Justices Marina L. Buzon and Edgardo P. Cruz concurring, dismissed the petition on June 7, 2000, finding the RTC validly acquired jurisdiction and no ground to annul the judgment.
Petitioner sought r...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court acquire jurisdiction over the person of petitioner by service of the complaint and summons through her sister, Ma. Luisa Herrera?
- Was the judgment of the trial court final and executory and did the service of the decision and subsequent execution and sale deprive peti...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)