Case Digest (G.R. No. 171219)
Facts:
Petitioner, ATTY. FE Q. PALMIANO-SALVADOR, alleged that she bought on September 7, 1993 a parcel of land at 1287 Castanos Street, Sampaloc, Manila, which had been occupied by lessee Jelly Galiga from 1979 to 1993; petitioner remained in possession from November 1993. Respondent, CONSTANTINO ANGELES, was the registered owner (TCT No. 150872), and through Rosauro Diaz filed an ejectment complaint on October 12, 1994 with the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC); the MeTC rendered judgment for respondent on November 29, 1999, the Regional Trial Court affirmed on March 12, 2003, and the Court of Appeals dismissed petitioner’s appeal on September 16, 2005 with reconsideration denied January 13, 2006.Issues:
- What is the effect of a complaint filed by a person who fails to prove authority to represent the plaintiff?
- Did the MeTC acquire jurisdiction over respondent when the purported represe
Case Digest (G.R. No. 171219)
Facts:
- Parties and subject property
- Petitioner: ATTY. FE Q. PALMIANO-SALVADOR, claimant in possession of the parcel since November 1993.
- Respondent: CONSTANTINO ANGELES, registered owner of the parcel, substituted by Luz G. Angeles.
- Parcel: Lot located at 1287 Castanos Street, Sampaloc, Manila, evidenced by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 150872.
- Possession and alleged sale
- Jelly Galiga occupied the parcel from 1979 to 1993 as a lessee under a lease contract.
- Petitioner alleged purchase of the parcel from Galiga on September 7, 1993; petitioner remained in possession from November 1993 onward.
- Respondent sent petitioner a demand to vacate dated November 18, 1993; petitioner did not comply.
- Filing of ejectment action and documentary record
- Complaint for ejectment filed October 12, 1994 with the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC), Manila, Branch 16, docketed Civil Case No. 146190-CV, filed by respondent through Rosauro Diaz, Jr.
- The verification and certification attached to the complaint, dated October 12, 1994, was executed by Diaz who alleged he was respondent’s attorney-in-fact; no document proving such authority was attached to the complaint.
- On December 11, 1995, respondent attached a document designated as a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) dated November 16, 1994, purportedly executed in favor of Diaz and notarized by Robert F. McGuire of Santa Clara County, California.
- No certification from the Philippine Consulate General in San Francisco accompanied the SPA to confirm the notary’s authority; the trial court declined to give full faith and credit to the notarial act.
- Trial court and appellate proceedings
- The MeTC rendered judgment on November 29, 1999 ordering petitioner to vacate, to pay PHP 1,000 monthly as reasonable compensation from November 1993 until vacatur, and to pay PHP 5,000 attorney’s fees and costs.
- Petitioner appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC); the RTC denied the appeal in a Decision dated March 12, 2003 and denied reconsideration in an Order dated March 16, 2004.
- Petitioner filed a petition for review with the C...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Threshold jurisdictional issue
- Whether the complaint filed by Diaz without proof of authority to represent respondent constituted a valid complaint that invoked the MeTC’s jurisdiction over the plaintiff and the subject case.
- Evidentiary and ancillary questions arising from the threshold issue
- Whether the SPA dated November 16, 1994 and produced after filing could validate Diaz’s authority retroactively for a complaint filed October 12, 1994.
- Whether the notarial attestation by Robert F. McGuire of Santa Clara County, lacking Philippine Consulate certification, carried evidentiary weigh...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)