Case Digest (G.R. No. 79688) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Pleasantville Development Corporation v. Court of Appeals, petitioner Pleasantville Development Corporation (hereinafter “Pleasantville”) sold Lot 9, Phase II of Pleasantville Subdivision, Bacolod City, to Edith Robillo. Robillo thereafter sold her rights to respondent Eldred Jardinico, who secured Transfer Certificate of Title No. 106367 on December 19, 1978. Unbeknownst to Jardinico, respondent Wilson Kee had begun constructing improvements—his residence, a store, and an auto repair shop—on Lot 9 after C.T. Torres Enterprises, Inc. (“CTTEI”), Pleasantville’s exclusive agent, erroneously delivered that lot instead of Lot 8, which Kee had bought on installment by contract dated March 26, 1974. Kee, believing he had been correctly pointed to Lot 8, paid relocation and lot‐plan fees and relied on CTTEI’s employee, Zenaida Octaviano, to identify the boundaries. Upon discovering the error, Jardinico demanded vacatur and removal of the structures. Kee filed a third‐party complaint Case Digest (G.R. No. 79688) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Ownership and Registration
- Edith Robillo purchased from Pleasantville Development Corporation (PDC) Lot 9, Phase II, Pleasantville Subdivision, Bacolod City.
- In 1975 Eldred Jardinico acquired Robillo’s rights and, upon completing payments, secured Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 106367 to Lot 9 on December 19, 1978.
- Kee’s Purchase and Improvements
- On March 26, 1974, Wilson Kee bought Lot 8 on installment from C.T. Torres Enterprises, Inc. (CTTEI), PDC’s exclusive agent; he paid relocation and lot-plan fees and was entitled to possession before full payment.
- CTTEI’s employee, Zenaida Octaviano, mistakenly pointed out Lot 9 instead of Lot 8; Kee, relying on CTTEI’s identification, built a house, store, auto-repair shop, and other improvements on Lot 9.
- Procedural History
- After discovering the error, Jardinico demanded vacatur on January 30, 1981; upon Kee’s refusal, Jardinico filed ejectment with damages in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC), and Kee filed a third-party complaint against PDC and CTTEI.
- MTCC held CTTEI negligent, ordered Kee to vacate and remove improvements, assessed daily rentals, and awarded attorney’s fees; the RTC reversed CTTEI’s liability, found Kee in bad faith, and dismissed the third-party complaint; the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed again, declaring Kee a builder in good faith, imputing CTTEI’s negligence to PDC, dispensing with rentals, and remanding for valuation of improvements.
- PDC filed a petition for review in the Supreme Court to challenge the CA decision.
Issues:
- Was Wilson Kee a builder in good faith when he constructed improvements on Lot 9?
- What is the liability of Pleasantville Development Corporation and its agent, C.T. Torres Enterprises, Inc., for the mistaken delivery and resultant damages?
- Is the award of attorney’s fees proper under the circumstances?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)