Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, the instant Petition is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.” [3] The assailed Resolution denied petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration. [4] The Facts Petitioner and respondent were married on March 15, 1981. Out of this union, two children were born, Cheryl Lynne and Albryan.
WHEREFORE, the instant Petition is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit. [3] The assailed Resolution denied petitioners Motion for Reconsideration. [4] The Facts Petitioner and respondent were married on March 15, 1981. Out of this union, two children were born, Cheryl Lynne and Albryan. On October 27, 1993, respondent filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Negros Occidental, Branch 51, a Complaint [5] for the annulment of his marriage to petitioner. The Complaint was docketed as Civil Case No. 93-8098. Afterwards he filed an Amended Complaint [6] dated November 8, 1993 for the declaration of nullity of his marriage to petitioner based on her alleged psychological incapacity. The case went to trial with respondent presenting his evidence in chief. After his last witness testified, he submitted his Formal Offer of Exhibits [7] dated February 20, 1998. Instead of offering any objection to it, petitioner filed a Motion to Dismiss (Demurrer to Evidence) [8] dated May 11, 1998. The lower court then allowed a number of pleadings to be filed thereafter. Finally, the RTC issued its December 2, 1998 Order [9] denying petitioners Demurrer to Evidence. It held that [respondent] established a quantum of evidence that the [petitioner] must controvert. [10] After her Motion for Reconsideration [11] was denied in the March 22, 1999 Order, [12] petitioner elevated the case to the CA by way of a Petition for Certiorari, [13] docketed as CA-GR No. 53100. Ruling of the Court of Appeals The CA held that the denial of the demurrer was merely interlocutory; hence, certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court was not available. The proper remedy was for the defense to present evidence; and if an unfavorable decision was handed down later, to take an appeal therefrom. [14] In any event, no grave abuse of discretion was committed by respondent judge in issuing the assailed Orders. [15] The CA also ruled that the propriety of granting or denying a demurrer to evidence rests on the sound exercise of the [trial] courts discretion. [16] Further, the [p]etitioner failed to show that the issues in the court below [had] been resolved arbitrarily or without basis. [17] Hence, this Petition. [18] The Issues In her Memorandum, [19] petitioner submits the following issues for our consideration: 1) Upon the denial of petitioners demurrer to evidence under Rule 33 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, is she under obligation, as a matter of inflexible rule, as what the Court of Appeals required of her, to present her evidence, and when an unfavorable [verdict] is handed down, appeal therefrom in the manner authorized by law, despite the palpably and patently weak and grossly insufficient or so inadequate evidence of the private respondent as plaintiff in the annulment of marriage case, grounded on psychological incapacity under Art. 36 of The Family Code? Or under such circumstances, can the extraordinary remedy of certiorari be directly and immediately resorted t