Case Digest (G.R. No. 187342)
Facts:
Robert C. Martinez v. Noels. Buen, G.R. No. 187342, April 05, 2017, Supreme Court Third Division, Jardeleza, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Robert C. Martinez (Martinez) was defendant in a MeTC civil action filed by respondent Noel S. Buen (Buen) for recovery of a Toyota Tamaraw Revo (Civil Case No. 180403-CV). Buen alleged ownership based on registration and explained the vehicle had been used by the corporation Fairdeal Chemical Industries, Inc., of which he was majority shareholder; Martinez answered that the vehicles were corporate property and counterclaimed for damages and attorneys’ fees.
After Buen posted bond, the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC), Branch 16, Manila temporarily awarded possession to Buen (April 19, 2005). While the civil case was pending, Martinez filed a qualified-theft complaint against Buen in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 19; a warrant issued and Buen went into hiding. At a scheduled hearing on March 28, 2006 Buen’s counsel informed the MeTC that Buen could not attend his cross‑examination and moved to archive the case; the MeTC instructed formalization of the motion. Buen filed a written Motion to Send Case to the Files of the Archives on March 31, 2006 and the motion was set for hearing on April 11, 2006. Martinez and his counsel did not appear and did not file the court‑directed comment; the MeTC granted the Motion to Archive on April 11, 2006.
Martinez filed a Comment/Opposition on April 21, 2006 which the MeTC treated as a motion for reconsideration and, in an Order dated May 5, 2006, dismissed the case pursuant to Section 3, Rule 17 of the Rules of Court. Martinez later moved to quash a writ of seizure; the MeTC initially ordered Buen to return the vehicle (Nov. 13, 2006) then directed surrender to the sheriff (Nov. 27, 2006). Buen moved for reconsideration (Dec. 13, 2006) and informed the court he was then detained and ready for cross‑examination; the MeTC denied reconsideration on January 25, 2007, declaring its earlier order final.
Buen filed a petition for certiorari in the RTC (Branch 14) alleging grave abuse of discretion by the MeTC in treating the Comment/Opposition as a motion for reconsideration, and challenging the dismissal under Section 3, Rule 17. The RTC granted certiorari and nullified the MeTC’s May 5, 2006 and January 25, 2007 orders, directed the sheriff to deliver possession to Buen and ordered the MeTC to set the civil case for continuance of trial (November 20, 2007 RTC Decision). Martinez filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals (CA) without seeking reconsideration of the RTC decision; the CA, through a decision penned by Associate Justice Normandie B. Pizarro (with tw...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 the proper remedy to assail the MeTC’s May 5, 2006 Order of Dismissal entered pursuant to Section 3, Rule 17 of the Rules of...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)