Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED in part. The Decision of the Court of Appeals dated August 20, 2003 sustaining the trial court's denial of petitioner's motion to dismiss, as well as its resolution dated December 16, 2003 denying reconsideration, is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The case is REMANDED to the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City for further proceedings to resolve anew with deliberate dispatch the motion to dismiss in accordance with Section 3, Rule 16 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure …
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED in part. The Decision of the Court of Appeals dated August 20, 2003 sustaining the trial court's denial of petitioner's motion to dismiss, as well as its resolution dated December 16, 2003 denying reconsideration, is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The case is REMANDED to the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City for further proceedings to resolve anew with deliberate dispatch the motion to dismiss in accordance with Section 3, Rule 16 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure as elucidated in this Decision. [6] (Emphasis supplied) Meanwhile, respondent was declared in default by the RTC on May 28, 2003 for failure to file his answer. As a result, plaintiffs were allowed to present evidence ex parte . [7] At the time petitioner Gertrudes testified during trial, she was already 86 years old. She related how she felt abandoned and betrayed by her son Douglas. She felt neglected when he cut off her monthly allowance of P10,000. Douglas lived in a property worth several millions of pesos while she lived in a modest house. She filed the complaint to compel him to render an accounting of all properties which she and her husband acquired jointly during their union. [8] RTC Disposition On March 16, 2005, the RTC rendered a Decision [9] ordering respondent to account for the properties subject of the complaint. The fallo of the decision stated: WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, this Court finds for plaintiffs and hereby enters judgment ordering defendant Douglas Lu Ym to account the following real properties owned by the late Cayetano Ludo and held by him in trust and for the benefit of herein plaintiffs , on the following properties, as follows: Tax Declaration No. 01616 under defendant's name covering Lot No. 1 (Exh. "H"); Tax Declaration No. 02207 under defendant's name covering Lot No. 3 (Exh. "I"); Tax Dec. No. 02143 under the name of Lu Ym Annabel (wife of defendant Douglas Lu Ym) (Exh. "J"); Tax Dec. No. 00024 under the name of Annabelle Lu Ym (defendant's wife) (Exh. "K"); Tax Dec. No. 02827 under the name of Annabelle Lu Ym (defendant's wife) (Exh. "L"); Tax Dec. No. 02826 under the name of Annabelle Lu Ym (defendant's wife) (Exh. "M"); Tax Dec. No. 03157 under the name of Annabelle Lu Ym (defendant's wife) (Exh. "N"); Transfer Certificate of Title No. 102557 under the name of defendant Douglas Lu Ym (Exh. "0-1"); Tax Dec. No. 02143 under the name of Annabelle Lu Ym (defendant's wife) (Exh. "P"); Tax Dec. No. 0028 under the name of Annabelle Lu Ym (defendant's wife) (Exh. "S"); Tax Dec. No. 01615 under the name of Annabelle Lu Ym (defendant's wife) (Exh. "U"); Tax Dec. No. 01617 under the name of Annabelle Lu Ym (defendant's wife) (Exh. "W"); Tax Dec. No. 02208 under the name of defendant Douglas covering Lot No. 3 (Exh. "Y"); the 1/3 share of the late Cayetano Ludo with the Ludo & Lu Ym Development Corporation, among which are the following: Transfer Certificate of Title Nos. 17029 (Exh. "AA"), 17032 (Exh. "BB"), 22325 (Exh.
G.R. No. 173628 - SEVERINO S. CAPIRAL, VS. SIMEONA CAPIRAL ROBLES AND VICENTE CAPIRAL.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 173628 -
CaseG.R. No. 137650 - GUILLERMA TUMLOS, VS. SPOUSES MARIO FERNANDEZ AND LOURDES FERNANDEZ.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 137650 -
CaseG.R. No. 179556 - CONCORDIA MEDEL GOMEZ, VS. CORAZON MEDEL ALCANTARA.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 179556 -