Title
Salcedo vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. L-18480
Decision Date
Jan 31, 1963
Remedios Rodriguez sued Leopoldo Salcedo for child recognition and support. Summons served via housemaid upheld; default judgment affirmed. Appeals dismissed; execution enforced.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 142131)

Applicable Law

The legal context revolves around procedural aspects of civil litigation, specifically those concerning service of summons and the rights of a party in default within the framework established by the Civil Code and procedural rules in the Philippine judicial system.

Factual Background

In January 1956, Remedios Rodriguez initiated a civil case (Civil Case No. 42-G) against Leopoldo Salcedo in the Court of First Instance of Quezon. The complaint sought recognition of her child, Ricardo Eulogio Rodriguez, as illegitimate and requested support, damages, and attorney's fees. The court served summons to Salcedo at his residence through his housemaid on July 25, 1956. Salcedo did not respond within the required time, resulting in a default judgment against him on September 4, 1956, followed by a judgment ordering him to provide monthly support and pay significant damages.

Judgments and Subsequent Legal Actions

After an alias writ of execution was issued against Salcedo's properties, he claimed he was unaware of the court's decision until the execution was served. He filed motions to set aside the judgment and execution order, which were denied due to timeliness issues and lack of a supporting affidavit. Salcedo did not appeal these denials. Following a second alias writ of execution, he filed a certiorari petition in the Court of Appeals questioning the validity of the service of summons, which was dismissed; Salcedo did not pursue a further review of this ruling.

Proceedings in the Court of Appeals

Salcedo later attempted to appeal the merits of the case and obtain an extension of time to file a record on appeal. However, the court dismissed these motions and issued a third alias writ of execution. He subsequently filed a petition for mandamus asking the Court of Appeals to compel the lower court to approve his record on appeal. The Court of Appeals found that the trial court had acted within its discretion in its earlier rulings.

Legal Conclusions

The primary issue under consideration was the validity of the service of summons that Salcedo argued rendered the court's judgment void. The Court found that this issue had been previously raised by Salcedo through multiple motions, all of whi

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.