Case Digest (G.R. No. 79253)
Facts:
United States of America and Maxine Bradford, G.R. No. 79253, March 01, 1993, the Supreme Court En Banc, Davide, Jr., J., writing for the Court. This is a Rule 65 petition for certiorari and prohibition attacking Branch 22, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cavite’s Resolution of 17 July 1987 (denying a motion to dismiss and granting a motion for preliminary attachment) and the writ of attachment issued on 28 July 1987.The private respondent, Nelia T. Montoya, an American citizen employed as an identification (I.D.) checker at the U.S. Navy Exchange (NEX) at JUSMAG headquarters in Quezon City, sued Maxine Bradford (petitioner), also an American and manager of the NEX-JUSMAG, in Civil Case No. 224-87 in the RTC of Cavite for damages arising from an alleged oppressive, discriminatory and unlawful search of Montoya’s person, car and bags on 22 January 1987. Montoya alleged she was singled out, searched in the parking area outside the store in the presence of onlookers, and suffered humiliation and injury to her dignity; she prayed for moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees. Summons were served on Bradford on 13 May 1987.
Instead of answering, Bradford — joined by the United States of America (public petitioner), which was not impleaded as a defendant — filed on 25 June 1987 a Motion to Dismiss asserting sovereign immunity of the U.S. and official immunity for acts done in the performance of official functions under the Philippines‑U.S. Military Assistance Agreement and the Military Bases Agreement (and related base regulations). Montoya moved for preliminary attachment on 6 July 1987 alleging Bradford was about to depart and would dissipate assets. The trial court granted two short extensions to answer but ultimately, on 17 July 1987, denied the motion to dismiss as not indubitable and granted the preliminary attachment (subject to bond); the writ issued 28 July 1987.
Petitioners filed this Rule 65 petition in this Court on 6 August 1987 assailing the trial court’s 17 July 1987 Resolution and the attachment writ as grave abuse of discretion. The trial court later declared Bradford in default for failure to answer; Montoya presented evidence ex parte and on 10 September 1987 the RTC rendered judgment in Montoya’s favor awarding P300,000 moral damages, P100,000 exemplary damages and P50,000 as actual expenses and attorney’s fees. Petitioners sought a restraining order in this Court (noted 23 September 1987); a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) enjoining enforcement was issued on 7 December 1987.
This Court gave due course to the petition (order of 28 November 1988), required memoranda, and ultimately resolved the petition on 1 March 1993. The Supreme Court considered procedural lapses (the U.S. having not...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court commit grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction by denying the motion to dismiss grounded on sovereign immunity and official immunity?
- Are the United States and Bradford immune from suit in the Philippines for the acts complained of — i.e., does sovereign immunity or official immunity bar Montoya’s action?
- If Bradford’s acts were ultra vires or occurred outside her official territory of authority, may Philippine courts entertain the suit and inquire into th...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)