Title
Vda. de Manguerra vs. Risos
Case
G.R. No. 152643
Decision Date
Aug 28, 2008
Estafa case involving forged mortgage deed; deposition of elderly complainant taken improperly; SC ruled deposition must follow criminal procedure, affirming CA's voiding of deposition.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 152643)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Case Background
    • Petitioners: Concepcion Cuenco Vda. de Manguerra and Hon. Ramon C. Codilla, Jr., Presiding Judge, RTC Cebu City, Branch 19.
    • Respondents: Raul Risos, Susana Yongco, Leah Abarquez, and Atty. Gamaliel D.B. Bonje.
  • Underlying Criminal Proceedings (RTC CBU-52248)
    • October 27, 1999 (amended November 18, 1999): Criminal information for Estafa Through Falsification of Public Document filed against respondents.
    • Allegation: falsified real estate mortgage deed on the “Gorordo property,” purportedly signed by Concepcion Cuenco.
  • Health and Suspension Motions
    • September 10, 1999: Concepcion, while on vacation in Manila, confined at Makati Medical Center for upper gastrointestinal bleeding and ordered to remain for treatment.
    • November 24, 1999: Respondents moved to suspend criminal proceedings due to prejudicial question pending in Civil Case CEB-20359 (nullity of mortgage).
    • May 11, 2000: RTC granted suspension; June 5, 2000: Motion for reconsideration denied. Concepcion filed CA certiorari (CA-G.R. SP 60266) challenging those orders.
  • Deposition of Concepcion Cuenco
    • August 16, 2000: Motion to take Concepcion’s deposition filed, citing her advanced age and infirmity.
    • August 25, 2000: RTC granted motion; directed deposition before the Clerk of Court in Makati City; November 3, 2000: Motion for reconsideration denied.
    • March 9, 2001: Deposition taken at Concepcion’s residence after venue motions.
  • Proceedings in the Court of Appeals
    • CA-G.R. SP 62551: Respondents assailed RTC’s August 25 and November 3, 2000 orders.
    • August 15, 2001 Decision: CA set aside both RTC orders and declared any deposition taken thereunder void.
    • March 12, 2002 Resolution: Denied motion for reconsideration, citing need for face-to-face confrontation under Section 15, Rule 119, RPC.
  • Petition for Review Before the Supreme Court
    • Filed under Rule 45, challenging CA’s application of procedural rules and the non-joinder of the People of the Philippines.
    • Presented two primary issues for resolution (see Issues below).

Issues:

  • Whether Rule 23 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure applies to the deposition of petitioner in a criminal case.
  • Whether the failure to implead the People of the Philippines in a certiorari petition arising from a criminal case constitutes a waivable defect.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.