Case Digest (G.R. No. 148482)
Facts:
Tamayo, Joseph D. D. et al. v. Tamayo, Jose D., Jr. et al., G.R. No. 148482, August 12, 2005, the Supreme Court Third Division, Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners Joseph Dorman D. Tamayo, Laureana D. Tamayo and Linaflor D. Tamayo are illegitimate children of Dorothela Dayanghirang‑Tamayo by Jose Matuco; respondents Jose D. Tamayo, Jr., Florits Tamayo‑Magno, Luzminda Tamayo‑Anthony and Fortuna Tamayo‑Enriquez are Dorothela’s legitimate children by Dr. Jose Tamayo, Sr. In 1977 spouses Tamayo executed a Deed of Donation Inter Vivos in favor of respondents covering two parcels later evidenced by TCT Nos. T‑61159 and T‑61160. Dr. Jose Tamayo, Sr. died on October 7, 1990.
On June 13, 1996 petitioners filed in the Regional Trial Court, Branch 11, Davao City, a complaint to revoke the donation, alleging preterition from the donor’s estate and fraud in execution of the deed. The trial court dismissed the complaint on several grounds: petitioners failed to offer and prove the alleged donation document; questions of heirship and preterition were premature in the absence of estate settlement; and, in any event, an action to revoke for fraud would be barred by the five‑year prescriptive period from the donor’s death, since the complaint was filed in 1996.
Petitioners appealed to the Court of Appeals but did not pay appellate docket and other lawful fees within the period for taking an appeal. The Court of Appeals, in CA‑G.R. CV No. UDK‑6185, dismissed the appeal for failure to pay the fees, and denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration despite their belated tender of two manager’s checks and the explanation that the trial court and the Court of Appeals did not advise when the fees were to be paid. Petitioners then...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the dismissal by the Court of Appeals for failure to pay appellate docket and other lawful fees within the period for taking an appeal proper?
- Does the statutory wording "may" in Section 1(c), Rule 50 render dismissal for nonpayment directory rather than mandatory?
- Does petitioners’ excuse — that neither the trial court nor the Court of Appeals advised them when to pay the appellate docket f...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)