Case Summary (G.R. No. 153126)
Applicable Law
This case is governed by the 1987 Philippine Constitution as the decision date is September 11, 2003. The relevant procedural rules are found in the Rules of Court, particularly Rules surrounding summary judgments.
Nature of Dispute
The relationship began with respondent purchasing livestock and hogs from petitioner Monterey Foods Corporation for over twelve years, accruing an unpaid balance of approximately P87,434,689.37 due to non-payment. In 1998, the parties entered into a contract growing agreement, which allowed the petitioner to supply livestock for the respondent to manage on his farm in San Jose, Batangas. Disputes arose regarding the performance of contractual duties, leading to respondent's claims against the petitioners for unpaid services totaling P1,280,000.00.
Procedural History
The trial court's pre-trial and subsequent judgment followed a series of proceedings, including the initial failure of the petitioners to appear for the pre-trial conference, which resulted in them being declared in default. The trial court subsequently awarded the respondent the claimed amount, but a motion for new trial by petitioners led to a reversal and re-institution of proceedings, allowing the presentation of new arguments.
Admission of Liability and Partial Summary Judgment
During the hearings, the petitioners acknowledged their liability under the contract growing agreement for a reduced amount of P482,766.88. This judicial admission prompted the trial court to grant a partial summary judgment in favor of the respondent, allowing for the execution of that judgment despite remaining claims in the case. The court found that the absence of genuine issues concerning these admitted amounts warranted the summary judgment.
Issues Raised by Petitioners
Petitioners contended various legal errors, including claims of the Court of Appeals sanctioning an execution of a judgment not final in nature, issues of due process surrounding the summary judgment, and improper proceedings due to alleged lack of an opportunity for a hearing on the motion for summary judgment.
Court's Analysis
The court reaffirmed that summary judgments serve the purpose of expediting cases by eliminating the need for trial when no material facts are genuinely disputed. In this case, it was determined that the petitioners' admission led to the re
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 153126)
Case Overview
- The case involves a petition for review filed by Monterey Foods Corporation and Ramon F. Llanos against Victorino E. Eserjose and the Branch Sheriff of Quezon City.
- The petition seeks to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals dated November 21, 2001, which upheld the Orders of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 224, in Civil Case No. Q-98-36421.
- The central issue revolves around the execution of a partial summary judgment and the procedural fairness of the trial court's actions.
Background of the Case
- For twelve years, Eserjose purchased live cattle and hogs from Monterey Foods Corporation, accumulating an overdue account of ₱87,434,689.37 due to non-payment.
- In 1998, a contract growing agreement was established where Monterey Foods supplied livestock for Eserjose to raise on his farm in San Jose, Batangas.
- After five months, Monterey withdrew from the agreement, claiming Eserjose failed to post a bond and poorly managed the livestock.
- Eserjose demanded payment for services rendered under the agreement totaling ₱1,280,000.00, leading him to file a suit for damages in the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City.
Procedural History
- The petitioners failed to appear at a scheduled pre-trial conference, resulting in a default order allowing Eserjose to present evidence ex parte.
- Subsequently, the trial court rendered a judgment in favor of Eserjose, ordering the petitioners to pay ₱1,280,000.00, ₱100,000.00 in damages, and ₱50,000.00 in a