Case Digest (G.R. No. 174436)
Facts:
In Thomas Yang v. The Honorable Marcelino R. Valdez, Spouses Ricardo and Milagros Morante (G.R. No. 73317, August 31, 1989), petitioner Thomas Yang, treasurer of the Morante spouses’ corn trading business, held legal title to two Isuzu cargo trucks that the Morantes purportedly acquired between 1982 and 1984 and actually possessed. On January 3, 1985, Yang allegedly had the trucks seized from their parking spot in front of the Coca-Cola Plant in General Santos City and transferred to the warehouse of Manuel Yaphockun. On January 4, 1985, the Morantes filed a replevin complaint in the Regional Trial Court of General Santos City, Branch 22, naming Yang and Yaphockun as defendants and seeking immediate recovery of the vehicles. They posted a P560,000 replevin bond signed by Milagros Morante and Atty. Bayani Calonzo, prompting a seizure order on January 7, 1985. Yaphockun filed a counter-replevin bond on January 10, 1985, but the plaintiffs amended their complaint on January 13 to d...Case Digest (G.R. No. 174436)
Facts:
- Petition and assailed orders
- Petition for certiorari under Rule 65 filed by Thomas Yang to annul three interlocutory orders of RTC Branch 22, General Santos City dated 7 January, 18 January and 28 February 1985.
- The 7 January order approved the P560,000 replevin bond posted by spouses Ricardo and Milagros Morante; the 18 January order disapproved Manuel Yaphockun’s counter-bond; the 28 February order rejected Yang’s counter-replevin bond.
- Underlying replevin action
- On 4 January 1985, spouses Morante sued Yang (registered owner of two Isuzu trucks) and Yaphockun for replevin, alleging they had actual possession from 1982–1984 and were deprived of the trucks on 3 January 1985 when Yang moved them to Yaphockun’s warehouse.
- The Morantes applied for a writ of replevin and on 4 January posted a P560,000 bond (Milagros Morante and Atty. Bayani Calonzo as sureties); on 7 January the sheriff seized the trucks.
- Counter-bonds and subsequent proceedings
- On 10 January, Yaphockun filed a counter-bond of P560,000 with himself and another surety; on 13 January the Morantes amended their complaint dropping Yaphockun as defendant and on 14 January opposed his bond.
- On 18 January, the trial court disapproved Yaphockun’s counter-bond and ordered delivery to the Morantes; on 21 January Yang moved for a 15-day extension to answer; on 25 January he posted a P560,000 counter-bond which the court rejected as late; on 28 February the court reaffirmed its rejection.
Issues:
- Whether the trial court gravely abused its discretion in approving the Morantes’ replevin bond.
- Whether the bond was defective for lack of tangible security, improper surety composition, or failure to recite express return condition.
- Whether the Morantes’ amendment dropping Yaphockun deprived him of standing to file a counter-replevin bond.
- Whether Yang’s counter-replevin bond was correctly rejected as filed beyond the periods prescribed in Sections 5 and 6, Rule 60.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)