G.R. No. 122906 - DINAH B. TONOG, VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND EDGAR V. DAGUIMOL.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, on May 27, 1992, she filed a petition for relief from judgment. In a resolution dated September 15, 1992, the trial court set aside its original judgment and allowed petitioner to file her opposition to private respondents petition. The latter, in turn, filed a motion for reconsideration. In a related incident, petitioner filed on October 4, 1993, a motion to remand custody of Gardin Faith to her. On November 18, 1994, the trial court issued a resolution denying private respondents motion for reconsideration and granting petitioners motion for custody of their child, Gardin. Petitioner moved for immediate execution of the said resolution. Due to the adverse turn of events, private respondent filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals, docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 35971, questioning the actuations of the trial court. On March 21, 1995, the appellate court dismissed the petition on the ground of lack of merit. However, after private respondent filed a motion for reconsideration, the appellate court issued a Resolution [3] dated August 29, 1995 modifying its decision, as follows: Although We do find the Petition dismissible, insofar as it assails the September 15, 1993 Resolution of the respondent Court, giving due course to private respondents Petition for Relief from Judgment, and the November 18, 1995 Resolution denying his Motion for Reconsideration, We discern a good ground to let physical custody of subject child, Gardin Faith Belarde Tonog, continue under the petitioner, with whom the said child had been living, since birth. While it is understandable for private respondent, as mother, to assert and seek enforcement of her legal and natural rights as the natural guardian of her child, the emotional and psychological effects upon the latter of a change in custody should be considered. To be sure, transfer of custody of the child from petitioner to private respondent will be painful for the child who, all her life, has been in the company of petitioner and her paternal grandparents. Now, inasmuch as the issue of guardianship and custody over the same child is still pending determination before the respondent Court, the possibility of petitioners appointment as the guardian cannot be discounted. It would certainly wreak havoc on the childs psychological make-up to give her to the custody of private respondent, only to return her to petitioner should the latter prevail in the main case. Subjecting the child to emotional seesaw should be avoided. It is thus more prudent to let physical custody of the child in question be with petitioner until the matter of her custody shall have been determined by final judgment. WHEREFORE, the Decision, promulgated here on March 21, 1995 is accordingly MODIFIED, and status quo with respect to the physical custody of the child, Gardin Faith Belarde Tonog, is ordered. It is understood that the latter shall remain with petitioner until otherwise adjudged. Petitioner thus interposed