Case Summary (G.R. No. 95398)
Facts Surrounding Summons Service
Petitioner was allegedly served by substituted service at her Pasig City condominium unit. The Complaint named her address as “Alexandra Condominium Corp. (Alexandra Homes), E-2 Room 104, No. 29 Meralco Avenue, Pasig City.” The sheriff’s return states that “on many occasions” personal service failed because she was “usually out,” and on July 15, 1993, a copy was left with “Mr. Macky de la Cruz, caretaker,” who allegedly resided with her.
Trial Court’s Rejection of Jurisdictional Objection
By Order dated October 11, 1994, the RTC denied petitioner’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. It held (1) the substituted service complied with Section 8, Rule 14; (2) the sheriff’s return enjoys a presumption of regularity; and (3) petitioner’s evidence as to Singapore residency was insufficient. Reconsideration was likewise denied on December 21, 1994.
Court of Appeals’ Validation of Substituted Service
The CA affirmed, ruling that the documentary and testimonial evidence (including entry logs and a deposition reference) supported Alexandra Homes as petitioner’s residence. It deemed hearsay objections insufficient to overcome the presumption of regularity of the sheriff’s return and rejected extraterritorial-service arguments.
Requirements for Valid Substituted Service
Under Section 8, Rule 14 (old rules):
- Impossibility of prompt personal service after reasonable attempts (no fixed period, but usually up to one month with at least three attempts on two separate days).
- Detailed return describing each effort: dates, times, inquiries made, occupants’ names, and reasons for failure.
- Service on a “person of suitable age and discretion” residing in defendant’s home (i.e., over 18, literate in English, having a relation of confidence).
- If at business, service on a “competent person in charge” able to appreciate and relay the summons.
Analysis of the Sheriff’s Return
The return in this case was deficient. It used broad terms—“many occasions,” “reasonable hours,” “to no avail”—without specifying dates or describing the attempts. It failed to establish that personal service was impossible. The identity, age, relationship, and discretion of “Macky de la Cruz” were not detailed, nor was it shown he actually resided with or was authorized by petitioner to receive process.
Failure to Demonstrate Strict Compliance
Substituted service is “extraordinary” and must strictly comply with procedural prerequisites. The return’s vagueness concealed any real diligence. The sheriff did not narrate efforts with particularity as required by Domagas v. Jensen and related jurisprudence. Broad assertions cannot overcome the presumption of regularity when the return itself fails to establish compliance.
Inapplicability of Presumpti
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 95398)
Procedural History
- Civil Case No. 63337, styled Agapita Trajano, pro se, and on behalf of the Estate of Archimedes Trajano v. Imelda “Imee” R. Marcos-Manotoc, for recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment.
- Trial court issued summons (July 6, 1993) addressed to Alexandra Homes, Pasig City; sheriff’s return dated July 15, 1993 indicated substituted service on “Mr. Macky de la Cruz.”
- Petitioner failed to answer; court declared default (October 13, 1993).
- Petitioner filed special appearance and Motion to Dismiss (October 19, 1993), challenging jurisdiction for irregular and ineffective service of summons.
- Trial court denied the motion (October 11, 1994) and denied reconsideration (December 21, 1994).
- Petitioner filed Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition before the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 36214, January 20, 1995).
- CA rendered decision dismissing petition (March 17, 1997) and denied reconsideration (October 8, 1997).
- Petitioner elevated the case to the Supreme Court via Rule 45 Petition for Review on Certiorari.
Facts
- Respondent Trajano sought enforcement of a May 1, 1991 judgment by the U.S. District Court for the wrongful death of Archimedes Trajano, obtained against petitioner as alleged mastermind.
- Summons and complaint were served at Alexandra Condominium Corporation, Unit E-2-104, 29 Meralco Avenue, Pasig City.
- Sheriff’s Return claimed “many occasions” of personal service attempts at “reasonable hours” but substituted service was effected on caretaker Macky de la Cruz.
- Petitioner’s evidence: witness testimony that she visited Alexandra Homes only twice; certification that the unit was unleased; Philippine passport and Singapore disembarkation/embarkation card attesting Singapore residency; challenge that “Mrs. Manotoc” entries largely unrelated.
- Respondent’s evidence: deposition testimony of Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. identifying petitioner’s residence at Alexandra Apartment, Greenhills; logbook entries (August 4, 1992–August