Title
Merchant vs. Del Rosario
Case
G.R. No. 2104
Decision Date
Mar 23, 1905
Petitioner sought mandamus to compel a judge to enter default in a land registration case; Supreme Court denied, ruling mandamus cannot control judicial discretion.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 2104)

Procedural Background

The case arises from a motion made by Edward B. Merchant, following a notice that required certain parties to appear on July 7, 1904, regarding their claim to the land title in question. Merchant sought to have a default entered against individuals who failed to appear as required. On July 14, 1904, Merchant's motion was presented, but the judge refused to enter defaults despite the stipulations of Section 35 of the relevant act.

Legal Framework

Section 35 of Act No. 496 states that a default may be entered in cases where no opposing reason exists. However, the determination of whether a valid reason appears falls within the discretion of the court. The petitioner argued that the court should be compelled to decide in his favor without further consideration of the stipulated facts or circumstances surrounding the case.

Writ of Mandamus

The petitioner invoked the writ of mandamus, which serves as a judicial remedy to compel a lower court or official to perform a duty that is mandated by law. However, the court emphasized that mandamus cannot be used to direct a judge's discretion or compel a specific ruling in a pending case. The court's ruling underscored the principle that judicial discretion must be preserved and protected from external influences, maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.

Conclusion and Ruling

In light of these considerations, the Supreme Court concluded that the dispute had been properly subm

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.