Case Digest (G.R. No. 202967)
Facts:
Alicia Y. Laurel, substituted by her sole heir and legal representative Juan Miguel Y. Laurel, petitioner, v. Ferdinand M. Vardeleon, respondent, G.R. No. 202967, August 05, 2015, Supreme Court, Second Division, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court.On July 23, 2004, petitioner Alicia Y. Laurel filed a complaint for recovery of possession and ownership and/or quieting of title over a 20,306-square-meter island in Caticlan, Malay, Aklan (Civil Case No. 7249) before Branch 6 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Kalibo, Aklan. Respondent Ferdinand M. Vardeleon denied the material allegations, claimed he purchased the island on April 9, 1973, and pleaded laches. A pre-trial order dated July 6, 2005 set three dates for petitioner’s presentation of evidence: September 7, 2005; October 12, 2005; and November 23, 2005.
On August 1, 2005 respondent moved to correct the pre-trial order to reflect an alleged admission that petitioner knew of respondent’s possession since 1975; the RTC denied that motion in an August 19, 2005 Order. Petitioner filed a motion to reset the September 7, 2005 setting which the RTC granted on September 7, 2005 provided petitioner defrays respondent’s counsel’s transportation and appearance fee; petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of that allowance went unacted upon.
At the October 12, 2005 hearing petitioner appeared with a substitute counsel and her first witness but orally moved to postpone trial because (a) incidents (the two pending motions for reconsideration) had not been resolved and (b) her principal counsel (who had interviewed the witness) was absent. The RTC denied petitioner’s oral motion to postpone, denied her pending motion for reconsideration regarding the September 7, 2005 order, denied respondent’s motion for reconsideration of the August 19, 2005 Order, and dismissed Civil Case No. 7249 for failure to prosecute pursuant to Section 3, Rule 17 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; the counterclaim was likewise dismissed. Petitioner’s November 9, 2005 motion for reconsideration was denied by the RTC on January 31, 2006.
Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA) (docketed CA-G.R. CEB CV No. 01360). In an October 13, 2011 Decision the CA affirmed the RTC dismissal, holding petitioner was present but not prepared to proceed, that no affidavit under Section 4, Rule 30 was filed to justify postponement, and that the dismissal for failure to p...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Regional Trial Court commit an error in dismissing Civil Case No. 7249 for failure to prosecute under Section 3, Rule 17 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the RT...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)