Case Digest (G.R. No. 200134)
Facts:
- Roberto Otero is the petitioner; Roger Tan is the respondent.
- Tan filed a complaint for collection of money and damages against Otero on July 28, 2005, in the MTCC of Cagayan de Oro City.
- Tan claimed Otero purchased petroleum products on credit totaling P270,818.01 from his Petron outlet between February 2000 and May 2001.
- Otero failed to pay despite several verbal demands.
- Otero was served summons and a copy of the complaint through his wife on August 31, 2005, but did not file an answer.
- Tan moved to declare Otero in default on November 18, 2005, due to his non-response.
- Otero opposed the motion, claiming he did not receive the summons or complaint.
- The MTCC declared Otero in default on April 26, 2006, after he failed to appear at hearings.
- Tan presented evidence ex parte, including employee testimonies and statements of account.
- On February 14, 2007, the MTCC ruled in favor of Tan, ordering Otero to pay the claimed amount, attorney's fees, and litigation costs.
- Otero appealed to the RTC, which affirmed the MTCC's decision on December 28, 2007.
- Otero's motion for reconsideration was denied, leading him to file a petition for review with the CA.
- The CA upheld the RTC's decision on April 29, 2011, prompting Otero to petition the Supreme Court.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The Supreme Court denied Otero's petition.
- Otero could appeal the judgment on limited grounds, specifically regarding the plaintiff's failure to prove material allegations.
- The Court found Tan had not properly authenticated the statements of account, making them inadmissib...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- A defendant declared in default loses the right to present defenses or evidence but retains the right to appeal on specific grounds.
- The failure to file an answer does not equate to a waiver of all rights, particularly...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 200134)
Facts:
The case involves Roberto Otero as the petitioner and Roger Tan as the respondent. The events leading to the case began when Tan filed a complaint for collection of a sum of money and damages against Otero on July 28, 2005, in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) of Cagayan de Oro City. Tan alleged that Otero had purchased petroleum products on credit from his Petron outlet in Valencia City, Bukidnon, amounting to P270,818.01 between February 2000 and May 2001. Despite several verbal demands for payment, Otero failed to settle his debt.
Otero was served with summons and a copy of the complaint through his wife on August 31, 2005, but he did not file an answer. Consequently, on November 18, 2005, Tan moved to declare Otero in default due to his failure to respond. Otero opposed this motion, claiming he had not received the summons or complaint. A series of hearings were scheduled, but Otero failed to appear, leading the MTCC to declare him in default on April 26, 2006. Tan was then allowed to present his evidence ex parte, which included testimonies from his employees and various statements of account.
On February 14, 2007, the MTCC ruled in favor of Tan, ordering Otero to pay the claimed amount along with attorney's fees and litigation costs. Otero appealed this decision to the Regional Trial Court (RTC), arguing that the MTCC's ruling was factually baseless and that he was deprived of due process. The RTC affirmed the MTCC's decision on...