Case Digest (G.R. No. 75962)
Facts:
Edgardo A. Tijing and Bienvenida R. Tijing, Petitioners, filed a petition for habeas corpus seeking custody of their son born on April 27, 1989, whom they allege is the same child later named John Thomas Lopez and then in the custody of Angelita Diamante, Respondent after an August 1989 disappearance and an alleged sighting in October 1993 in Hagonoy, Bulacan. The Regional Trial Court granted the petition and ordered release of the minor; the sheriff took custody and turned the child over to petitioners, but the Court of Appeals (Seventh Division) reversed and ordered custody returned to respondent, prompting this petition for review.Issues:
- Is habeas corpus the proper remedy to regain custody of the minor?
- Are Edgardo Tijing, Jr. and John Thomas Lopez one and the same person and the child of petitioners?
Ruling:
The Court granted the petition. It held that habeas corpus was the proper remedy and that the subject minor is the child of petitioners, thereby reversing the Case Digest (G.R. No. 75962)
Facts:
- Parties and procedural posture
- Edgardo A. Tijing and Bienvenida R. Tijing, petitioners, husband and wife, filed a petition for habeas corpus before the Regional Trial Court seeking custody of their youngest child.
- Court of Appeals (Seventh Division) and Angelita Diamante, respondents; Court of Appeals rendered a decision dated March 6, 1996 in CA-G.R. SP No. 39056 reversing the trial court.
- The present petition seeks review of the Court of Appeals decision; the Supreme Court issued its decision on March 8, 2001.
- Factual background and chronology
- Petitioners had six children; the youngest, Edgardo Tijing, Jr., was born on April 27, 1989 at the clinic of midwife and RN Lourdes Vasquez in Sta. Ana, Manila.
- Petitioner Bienvenida was employed as laundrywoman by private respondent Angelita Diamante, then residing in Tondo, Manila.
- In August 1989 Bienvenida entrusted four-month old Edgardo, Jr. to Angelita while she went marketing and later found that both Angelita and the child had disappeared.
- Bienvenida searched, complained to barangay and police, and later reconciled with her estranged husband to continue searching; no traces of the child were found until October 1993.
- In October 1993 Bienvenida read a tabloid report of the death of Tomas Lopez and went to Hagonoy, Bulacan, where she was allegedly shown a boy identified as John Thomas Lopez, pointed out by Benjamin Lopez, brother of the late Tomas Lopez.
- Bienvenida demanded return of the boy; Angelita refused; petitioners filed a petition for habeas corpus to recover the child.
- Trial evidence and testimony
- Petitioners presented two witnesses: Lourdes Vasquez and Benjamin Lopez.
- Lourdes Vasquez testified she assisted in the delivery of one Edgardo Tijing, Jr. on April 27, 1989 at her clinic and produced clinical records (log book, discharge order and signatures).
- Benjamin Lopez testified that his brother Tomas was sterile due to an accident; Tomas allegedly admitted that John Thomas Lopez was adopted and that he and Angelita had no children.
- Private respondent Angelita Diamante claimed she was the natural mother of John Thomas Lopez, that she gave birth on April 27, 1989 at the clinic of midwife Zosima Panganiban in Singalong, Manila, and that the birth was registered by her common-law husband Tomas Lopez on August 4, 1989.
- The birth certificate supposedly filed by Tomas Lopez contained a notation that Tomas and Angelita were legally married on October 31, 1974, though Angelita admitted she was a common-law wife.
- Trial court disposition and implementation
- On March 10, 1995 the Regional Trial Court concluded Angelita and Tomas could not have fathered or borne a child, found strong facial similarity between the child and Bienvenida, and ruled that Edgardo Tijing, Jr. and John Thom...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Proper remedy
- Whether habeas corpus is the proper remedy to regain custody of the minor in the circumstances of this case.
- Identity and parentage
- Whether Edgardo Tijing, Jr. and John Thomas Lopez are one and the same person. ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)