G.R. No. 185716 - People vs. Malana y Lardisabay

Case Summary (G.R. No. 185716)

Factual Background

The litigation concerned an action by HONGKONG BANK against the mercantile firm JURADO & CO. An order dated April 16, 1895 expressly included Don Ricardo Regidor as a general partner of Jurado & Co. at least for purposes of the bankruptcy proceeding. At various stages the defendants described the firm as being in liquidation and identified Don Basilio Teodoro as the liquidator.

Procedural History

The record showed several interlocutory orders. The April 6, 1898 order addressed a motion by Don Ricardo Regidor claiming improper inclusion in the bankruptcy; that order directed that the motion come up for hearing in the ordinary way and expressly did not decide its merits. A December 12, 1898 order dismissed the entire proceeding, but no order setting aside the April 16, 1895 inclusion of Don Ricardo Regidor as a general partner was called to the Court's attention. On March 8, 1902 the Court made an order prescribing the procedure to be followed in the case; had that procedure been followed the parties would have tried the case on its merits in August, 1902. In April, 1903 the plaintiff moved that the court assign a day for hearing the case; that motion was resubmitted on October 15, 1903. At the October 15, 1903 hearing Don Ricardo Regidor, as one of the partners, appointed an attorney to argue for the firm the motion then before the Court. The plaintiffs had filed their proofs, pleadings, and brief; no proofs nor brief of the defendants appeared of record.

The Parties' Contentions

Don Ricardo Regidor moved to be made a codefendant and argued that he was not properly included in the bankruptcy. The defendants asserted that the firm was in liquidation and that Don Basilio Teodoro served as liquidator; the death of the liquidator was presented as a circumstance relevant to the progress of the suit. The plaintiff urged the Court to fix a day for hearing and to require defendants to file their proofs, pleadings, and brief so that the case could be tried on the merits.

Court's Holdings and Orders

The Court denied Don Ricardo Regidor's motion to be made a codefendant. The Court held that the April 16, 1895 order had expressly included him in the bankruptcy as a general partner of Jurado & Co., and that nothing in the subsequent proceedings had shown that that order was incorrect. The April 6, 1898 order did not determine the merits of Regidor's motion. Because Regidor had been treated as a partner and in open court on October 15, 1903 had appointed an attorney to argue for the firm, the Court held that, as a partner, he was represented by the firm and had no right to appear as an individual separate from the firm. The Court further ordered that the suggestion of the death of the alleged liquidator, Don Basilio Teodoro, did not interfere with the progress of the suit. The Court held that the defendants were JURADO & CO. and not the liquidator personally, that the appointment of a new liquidator was not for the Court to make in the course of the action, and that if defendants did not appoint a new liquidator or substitute attorneys any required notices could be served on any partner of Jurado & Co. found in the Islands. The Court ordered the defendants to deliver to the plaintiffs, on or before December 15, 1903, three copies of their printed pleadings, proofs, and brief, and to file ten copies in the clerk's office on or before that date. The Court placed the case on the calendar of the January term, 1904, for hearing on the merits.

Legal Reasoning

The Court grounded its denial of Regidor's motion on the established order of April 16, 1895 that included him as a general partner in the bankruptcy and on the record action by whic

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 185716)

Parties and Posture

HONGKONG BANK was the plaintiff and appellant in the proceedings before the Court.
JURADO & CO. was the defendant and appellee in the proceedings before the Court.
The plaintiffs moved in April, 1903 to have the Court assign a day for hearing and resubmitted that motion on October 15, 1903.

Key Facts

The order of April 16, 1895 expressly included Don Ricardo Regidor in the bankruptcy as a general partner of JURADO & CO..
The order of April 6, 1898 merely decided that Don Ricardo Regidor's motion to contest his inclusion should come up for hearing in the ordinary way and expressly stated that the merits were not passed upon.
An order of December 12, 1898 dismissing the entire proceeding also appeared in the record and no other order setting aside the April 16, 1895 order was called to the Court's attention.
On October 15, 1903 Don Ricardo Regidor, as one of the partners, in open court appointed an attorney to argue for the firm.
The firm of JURADO & CO. was in liquidation, and Don Basilio Teodoro was alleged by the defendants to be the liquidator.
Don Basilio Teodoro died on July 12, 1903.
The plaintiffs had filed their pleadings, proofs, and brief, whereas no proofs nor brief of the defendants had been presented at the time of the October 15, 1903 submission.

Prior Orders

The Court's March 8, 1902 order provided the procedure to be pursued in the case.
The March 8, 1902 procedure, if followed by the parties, would have resulted in a trial on the merits in August, 1902.
The April 16, 1895 order including Don Ricardo Regidor as a general partner remained on the record without an effective order of set-aside shown to the Court.
The April 6, 1898 order explicitly refrained from deciding the merits of Don Ricardo Regidor's claim as to his inclusion in the bankruptcy.

Representation

The Court held that, as a partner of JURADO & CO., Don Ricardo Regidor was represented by the firm and had no right to appear as an individual separate from the firm.
The Court observed that, if individual appearance by a partner were permitted, then every partner would possess the same right.
The Court concluded that the rights o