Case Digest (G.R. No. L-68470)
Facts:
In Alice Reyes Van Dorn v. Hon. Manuel V. Romillo, Jr. and Richard Upton, decided October 8, 1985, petitioner Alice Reyes Van Dorn, a Filipino citizen, and private respondent Richard Upton, a United States citizen, were married in Hong Kong in 1972 and thereafter resided in the Philippines, where they had two children in 1973 and 1975. In 1982, the parties obtained a valid divorce decree in Nevada, U.S.A., under which respondent expressly represented—by written power of attorney executed in Nevada—that there was “no community of property” or “community obligations” to be adjudicated. Petitioner later remarried in Nevada. On June 8, 1983, respondent filed Civil Case No. 1075-P in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasay City, Branch CXV, seeking an accounting of the Galleon Shop in Ermita, Manila, as conjugal property and asking management rights. Petitioner moved to dismiss on the ground that respondent was estopped by the Nevada divorce decree and that any claim to conjugal propCase Digest (G.R. No. L-68470)
Facts:
- Parties and Marriage
- Petitioner Alice Reyes Van Dorn, Philippine citizen; respondent Richard Upton, U.S. citizen.
- Married in Hong Kong in 1972; established residence in the Philippines; two children born April 4, 1973 and December 18, 1975.
- Divorce and Subsequent Events
- Nevada divorce decree (1982) dissolving marriage on ground of incompatibility; parties represented there was “no community of property” or obligations.
- Petitioner remarried in Nevada to Theodore Van Dorn.
- June 8, 1983: Respondent filed Civil Case No. 1075-P (R.T.C. Pasay, Branch CXV) alleging the Galleon Shop (Ermita, Manila) is conjugal property; sought accounting and management rights.
- Procedural History
- September 15, 1983: Trial court denied petitioner’s Motion to Dismiss (claim barred by Nevada judgment).
- August 3, 1984: Trial court denied Motion for Reconsideration.
- Petitioner filed petition for certiorari and prohibition before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Availability of Certiorari/Prohibition to Review Interlocutory Order
- Is denial of a Motion to Dismiss interlocutory and appealable?
- Does “grave abuse of discretion” justify certiorari and prohibition?
- Effect of Foreign Divorce on Philippine Conjugal Property
- Does the Nevada decree bind the parties and bar respondent’s claim?
- Is recognition of the foreign divorce consistent with Philippine public policy (Art. 15, Civil Code)?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)