Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Gonzales, Et At. vs. Bugaay, Et Al.

    Uploaded by

    Jay Em
    324 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals' decision granting the respondents' demurrer to evidence in a case involving the partition of estate properties. The demurrer was filed after the trial court had already rendered its decision, which is not allowed. A demurrer must be filed before judgment is issued and is considered a motion to dismiss. While the trial court granted the respondents' motion for reconsideration to present documents, they did not comply and instead filed the improper demurrer. Thus, the trial court's decision stands and the Court of Appeals erred in granting the inadmissible demurrer and dismissing the complaint.

    Original Description:

    Gonzales, et at. vs. Bugaay, et al.

    Original Title

    Gonzales, et at. vs. Bugaay, et al.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals' decision granting the respondents' demurrer to evidence in a case involving the partition of estate properties. The demurrer was filed after the trial court had already rendered its decision, which is not allowed. A demurrer must be filed before judgment is issued and is considered a motion to dismiss. While the trial court granted the respondents' motion for reconsideration to present documents, they did not comply and instead filed the improper demurrer. Thus, the trial court's decision stands and the Court of Appeals erred in granting the inadmissible demurrer and dismissing the complaint.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    324 views2 pages

    Gonzales, Et At. vs. Bugaay, Et Al.

    Uploaded by

    Jay Em
    The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals' decision granting the respondents' demurrer to evidence in a case involving the partition of estate properties. The demurrer was filed after the trial court had already rendered its decision, which is not allowed. A demurrer must be filed before judgment is issued and is considered a motion to dismiss. While the trial court granted the respondents' motion for reconsideration to present documents, they did not comply and instead filed the improper demurrer. Thus, the trial court's decision stands and the Court of Appeals erred in granting the inadmissible demurrer and dismissing the complaint.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    TOPIC: DEMURRER executed by Enrico, as well as the titles

    in the name of the Petitioners, as null


    NENITA GONZALES, et at. Vs. MARIANO and void.
    BUGAAY, et al.  The Respondents filed an MR.
    G.R. No. 173008 | February 22, 2012 | Perlas-  The RTC granted the MR for the specific
    Bernabe, J.: purpose of receiving and offering for
    admission the documents referred to by
    Digested By: Dolar, Theodore Adriel S. the Respondents.
     Instead of presenting the documents,
    DOCTRINE: A Demurrer to Evidence, being the Respondents demurred to the
    considered a Motion to Dismiss, must be filed evidence presented by Petitioners.
    before the court renders its judgment.  The demurrer was denied, as well as
    the MR.
    FACTS:  Respondents elevated the case to the
     The deceased spouses Bartolome and CA through a petition for certiorari,
    Marcelina Ayad had 5 children: Enrico, imputing grave abuse of discretion on
    Encarnacion, Consolcation, Maximiano, the part of the RTC for denying their
    and Mariano. Mariano predeceased his Demurrer.
    parents without issue in 1943. Marcelina  The CA reversed the RTC and granted
    died in 1950 followed by Bartolome in the Demurrer, holding that there was no
    1964. Maximiano later died without sufficient evidence presented to grant
    issue in 1986. the reliefs prayed for in the complaint.
     The Petitioners in this case are the  Petitioners now elevate the case before
    children of Encarnacion. the SC through a petition for review on
     The Respondents are the children of certiorari under Rule 45.
    Consolacion and Enrico.
     This case stems from a Complaint for ISSUE: Whether the CA was correct in granting
    Partition and Annulment of Documents the Demurrer.
    filed by the Petitioners against the
    Respondents. HELD:
     Petitioners alleged that Enrico executed NO. In passing upon the sufficiency of
    fraudulent documents covering all the the evidence raised in a demurrer, the court is
    properties of the Spouses Ayad in favor merely required to ascertain whether there is
    of Consolacion, leaving nothing for competent or sufficient evidence to sustain the
    Petitioners, completely disregarding judgment. Being considered a motion to dismiss,
    their rights. Thus, Petitioners pray for a demurrer must be filed before the court
    the partition of the estate of Spouses renders its judgment.
    Ayad and the nullification of the
    documents executed by Enrico. In this case, the Respondents demurred
     Respondents claimed that Petitioners to Petitioners’ evidence after the RTC
    had long obtained their advance promulgated its Decision. While their MR was
    inheritance from the estate of the granted, it was for the sole purpose of receiving
    Spouses Ayad, and that the properties and offering for admission the documents not
    sought to be partitioned are now presented in trial. As Respondents never
    individually titled. complied with the directive, but instead filed a
     The RTC rendered a decision, awarding demurrer to evidence, their motion should be
    all the children of the Spouses Ayad ¼ deemed abandoned. Consequently, the RTC
    share in the estate, except Mariano who decision stands.
    predeceased the spouses.
     The RTC further declared that the Deed The CA committed a reversible error in
    of Extrajudicial Settlement and Partition granting the demurrer and dismissing the
    complaint for insufficiency of evidence. The
    demurrer was no longer an available remedy to
    Respondents and should not have been
    granted.

    PETITION IS GRANTED.

    You might also like