Case Digest (G.R. No. 138509) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Imelda Marbella-Bobis vs. Isagani D. Bobis, G.R. No. 138509, decided July 31, 2000 under the 1987 Constitution, the respondent married Maria Dulce B. Javier on October 21, 1985. Without annulling or terminating that marriage, he contracted a second marriage with the petitioner on January 25, 1996 in Quezon City and allegedly a third marriage thereafter. On February 25, 1998, petitioner filed a complaint-affidavit for bigamy, docketed Criminal Case No. Q98-75611 before the RTC Branch 226, Quezon City. In response, respondent filed a civil action for judicial nullity of his 1985 marriage on the ground of lack of a marriage license, and moved to suspend the bigamy proceedings as it posed a prejudicial question. The trial court granted suspension in an Order dated December 29, 1998. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court.Issues:
- Whether the pendency of a civil action for declaration of nullity o
Case Digest (G.R. No. 138509) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Marital history of respondent
- On October 21, 1985, respondent married Maria Dulce B. Javier; no annulment, nullification, or termination followed.
- On January 25, 1996, respondent contracted a second marriage with petitioner Imelda Marbella-Bobis and allegedly a third with Julia Sally Hernandez.
- Criminal and civil proceedings
- On February 25, 1998, petitioner filed a complaint-affidavit leading to Bigamy charges (Criminal Case No. Q98-75611, RTC Branch 226, Quezon City).
- Respondent thereafter filed a civil action for judicial nullity of the first marriage (ground: lack of marriage license) and moved to suspend the bigamy proceedings as a prejudicial question.
- The RTC granted suspension on December 29, 1998; motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this petition for certiorari.
Issues:
- Whether the filing of a civil action for declaration of nullity of a previous marriage constitutes a prejudicial question to a pending criminal case for bigamy.
- Whether the RTC erred in suspending the bigamy proceedings pending resolution of the civil nullity action under Article 40 of the Family Code.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)