TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART TWO CIVIL PROCEDURE DIGESTED

CASES

(Assignment - January 28, 2017)

CHAPTER III. ACTION, CAUSES OF ACTION AND PARTIES

1. SPOUSES. ARMANDO SILVERIO, SR. AND REMEDIOS 1

SILVERIO vs.SPOUSES. RICARDO AND EVELYN MARCELO
G.R. No. 184079 April 17, 2013
(Adjudication of Ownership in ejectment cases is merely provisional)

2. JUSTINO LARESMA vs. ANTONIO P. ABELLANA 3

G.R. No. 140973 November 11, 2004
442 SCRA 156
(Complaint must allege the assessed value of the real property)

3. SPOUSES TEODORO and ROSARIO SARAZA 5

and FERNANDO SARAZA vs. WILLIAM FRANCISCO
G.R. No. 198718 November 27, 2013
(Venue)

4. AVELINA ZAMORA, ET.AL. vs. HEIRS of CARMEN IZQUIERDO, 7

represented by their attorney-in-fact, ANITA F. PUNZALAN
G.R. No. 146195 November 18, 2004
(Primodial Aim of Brgy. Katarungan)

5. JESSE U. LUCAS vs. JESUS S. LUCAS 10

G.R. No. 190710 June 6, 2011
(In personam in rem and quasi in rem action)

6. FILOMENA DOMAGAS vs.VIVIAN LAYNO JENSEN, 12

G.R. No. 158407 January 17, 2005
(In personam in rem and quasi in rem action)

7. FIRST GAS POWER CORPORATION vs. REPUBLIC OF THE 14

PHILIPPINES, REP. BY THE OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
G.R. No. 169461 September 2, 2013
(In Rem Proceedings)

8. MA. TERESA C. BIACO vs. PHIL. COUNTRYSIDE RURAL BANK 16

G.R. No. 161417 February 8, 2007
515 SCRA 106
(Action Quasi In Rem)

9. STRONGHOLD INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., vs. 18

TOMAS CUENCA, MARCELINA CUENCA, MILAGROS CUENCA,
BRAMIE T. TAYACTAC, and MANUEL D. MARANON, JR.,
G.R. No. 173297 March 6, 2013
692 SCRA 473
(Cause of Action)

10. HEIRS OF MAGDALENO YPON, vs. GAUDIOSO PONTERAS 20

RICAFORTE AND THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF TOLEDO CITY,
G.R. No. 198680 July 8, 2013
(Cause of Action)

11.ANCHOR SAVINGS BANK (FORMERLY ANCHOR FINANCE AND 22

INVESTMENT CORPORATION) vs. HENRY H. FURIGAY, ET. AL.
G.R. No. 191178 March 13, 2013
(Sufficiency of Cause of Action)

12. SPOUSES LUIGI M. GUANIO and ANNA HERNANDEZ-GUANIO 24

vs. MAKATI SHANGRI-LA HOTEL and RESORT, INC
G.R. No. 190601 February 7, 2011
(Cause of action based on breached of contracts)

1. Barrazona vs. RTC of Baguio, 486 SCRA 555, 569

(Cause of action in unlawful detainer case)

2. Manaloto vs. Veloso III, 632 SCRA 347

(How cause of action be determined)
3. Unicapital, Inc. vs. Consing, Jr.
G.R. No. 192073, September 11, 2013
G.R. Nos. 75277 and 175285, September 11, 2013
(Lack of cause of action vs. failure to state cause of action)
(Joinder of Causes of Action)

4. Heirs of Magdaleno Ypon vs. Ricaforte

G.R. No. 19860, July 8, 2013
(Test of the sufficiency of the statement of cause of action)

5. Umale vs. Canoga Pars Development Corp., 654155, 162

(Tests to ascertain whether 2 suits relate to a single or common cause of action)

6. Spouses Hing vs. Choachuy

G.R. No. 179736, June 26, 2013
(Real Party in Interest)

7. Nepomuceno vs. Aquino III

G.R. No. 209251, November 19, 2013
(Doctrine of Locus standi)

8. Cagatao vs. Almonte

G.R. No. 174004, October 9, 2013
(Indispensable Parties)

9. Go. Vs. Distinction Properties Dev., Inc., 671 SCRA 461, April 25,
2012
(Dismissal for failure to implead an indispensable party)

10. Chua vs. Torres, 468 SCRA 358

(Necessary Parties)

11. Aguas vs. Llenos, 5 SCRA 959

(Effect of death of a party on a case)

(Assignment - February 4, 2017)

CHAPTER IV PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS

24. Tapay vs. Bancolo, 694 SCRA 1, March 20, 2013

(Significance of the signature of counsel)

25. Vda de Formoso vs. PNB, 650 SCRA 35

(Effect of lack of verification; Rule if there are several plaintiffs)

26. Asia United Bank vs. Goodland Co., Inc., 645 SCRA 205
(Certification against forum shopping; Meaning of Forum Shopping)

27. Abbot Laboratories vs. Alcaraz G.R. No. 192571, July 23, 2013
(Certification against forum shopping; Meaning of Forum Shopping)

28. Brown Araneta vs. Araneta, G.R. No. 190814, October 9, 2013
(Certification against forum shopping; Meaning of Forum Shopping)

29. Huibonhoa vs. Concepcion, 497 SCRA 562

(Rationale against Forum Shopping; How to determine Forum Shopping)

30. Anderson vs. Ho, 688 SCRA 8, January 7, 2013

(Who execute the certification against forum shopping)

31. La Mallorca vs. CA, 17 SCRA 739

(Alternative causes of action or defences)

32. Marinduque Mining and Industrial Corp. vs. CA, 567 SCRA 483
(Modes of Service and Filing)

33. Heirs of Reinoso, Sr. vs. CA, 654 SCRA 1

(Payment of Docket fees and acquisition of jurisdiction)

34. Sablas vs. Sablas, 526 SCRA 292, 296

(On DEFAULT)

35. Spouses delos SANTOS VS. Carpio, 501 SCRA 390

(On DEFAULT)

36. Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, 540 SCRA 431

(Remedies of a defending party declared in default)
37. Fernandez vs. CA, 691 SCRA 167, February 19, 2013
(INTERVENTION)

38. Vette Industrial Sale Co. vs. Cheng, 509 SCRA 532
(MOTIONS)

(Assignment - February 24, 2017)

CHAPTER V- SUMMONS

39. The Heirs of Reinoso Sr. vs. Court of Appeals, 654 SCRA 1, 9-10
(Rules on the Payment of Docket Fees)

40. Unicapital Inc. v. Consing, Jr., G.R. No. 192073, September 11, 2011
(Rules on the Payment of Docket Fees)

41. Julian vs. DBP, 661 SCRA, 745

(Rules on the payment of full docket fees within the prescribed period for taking
an appeal; Mandatory)

42. PCIB vs. Go, 642 SCRA 693

(Purpose of Specific Denial)

43. Venzon vs. Rural Bank of Buenavista, G.R. No. 178031, August 28, 2013
(On negative pregnant)

44. Pesane Animas Mongao vs. Pryce Properties Corp., 467 SCRA 201
(Affirmative defences)

45. Sablas vs. Sablas, 526 SCRA 292

(Requisites before a party can be declared in default)

46. Spouses delos Santos vs. Carpio, 501 SCRA 390

(Requisites before a party can be declared in default)

47. Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, 540 SCRA 431

(Remedies of a defending party declared in default)

48. Bayer Phil. Inc. vs. C.A., 340 SCRA 437

(Test of a compulsory counterclaim)

49. Financial Building, Corp. vs. Forbes Park Association, 338 SCRA 346
(Compulsory claim vs. Motion to Dismiss)

50. Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority vs. Heirs of Mioza, 641 SCRA
520 (INTERVENTION)

51. Ellice Agro-Industrial Corp. vs. Young, 686 SCRA 51, November 21, 2012
(Effect of knowledge of the filing of the action)

52. Trimica vs. Polaris Marketing Corp., G.R. No. L-29887, October 28, 1974
(Effect of knowledge of the filing of the action)

53. Macasaet vs. Co., G.R. No. 156759, June 5, 2013

(Purpose of Summons in action personam)

54. Velajo-Fong vs. Velayo, 510 SCRA 320

(Purpose of Summons in action personam)

55. E.B. Villarosa & Partner Ltd. V. Benito, 312 SCRA 65

(Enumeration of person to summons maybe served)

56. Chu vs. Mach Asia Trading, Corp., 694 SCRA 302, April 1, 2013
(When substituted maybe resorted service in person of the defendant)

57. Afdal vs. Carlos, 636 SCRA 389

(Purpose of Summons in action personam)

58. Manotoc vs. Court of Appeals, 499 SCRA 21

(On substituted service)

59. Vlason Enterprise vs. CA, 310 SCRA 26

(New summons is not required in Amended Complaint)

60. Velayo Fong vs. Velayo, 510 SCRA 320

(Service of summons to non-resident, extra territorial service)

61. Banco de Brasil vs. CA, 333 SCRA 545

(Service of summons to non-resident, extra territorial service)

62. PCIB vs. Alejandro, 533 SCRA 738

(Service of summons to defendant temporarily out of the Phil.)

63. Valmonte vs. Court of Appeals, 212 SCRA 92

(Service of summons to non-resident, extra territorial service)

64. Gemperle vs. Scheher, 125 Phil 458

(Service of summons to a representative)

65. Vlason Enterprise vs. CA, 310 SCRA 26

(New summons is not required in Amended Complaint)

(Assignment March 11, 2017)

CHAPTER V- SUMMONS

66. ELLICE Agro Industrial Corp. vs. Young, 686 SCRA 51

(Knowledge of a case is not equivalent to service of summons)
67. Trimica vs. Polaris Mktg. Corp.
G.R. No. L-29887, October 28, 1974
(Knowledge of a case is not equivalent to service of summons)

68. Macasaet vs. Co., G.R. No. 156759, June 5, 2013

(Service of summons as a coercive process to acquire jurisdiction)

69. Asiavest Ltd. vs. C.A., 296 SCRA 539

(In action in rem summons must still be served upon the defendant in order to
satisfy the due process requirement)

70. Manotoc vs. Court of Appeals, 499 SCRA 21

(Reasonable time before service of summons by substituted service)

71. E.B. Villaroa & Partners, Ltd. vs. Benito, 312 SCRA 65
(Service of summons to private domestic juridical entity)

72. Jose V. Boyon, 414 SCRA 216

(Compliance of requirements for substituted service of summons)

73. Banco de Brasil vs. Court of Appeals, 383 SCRA 545

(Extraterritorial Service of Summons)

74. Valmonte vs. Court of Appeals, 252 SCRA 32

(Service of Summons to representative)

75. Gemperle vs. Schenken, 125 Phil 458

(Service of Summons to representative)

76. Licomcen vs. Abainza, 691 SCRA 158, February 18, 2013
(Grounds which are not waived even if not invoked in a motion to dismiss)

77. Manuel Uy Sons, Inc. vs. Valbueco Inc. G.R. No. 179594, September 11,
2013
(Filing of a motion to dismiss even after answer)

78. Lim vs. Court of Appeals, 689 SCRA 705

(How denial of the motion to dismiss tainted with grave abuse of discretion)

79. AFP Retirement & Separation Benefits System vs. Republic, 694 SCRA 118,
March 20, 2013
(Dismissal with Prejudice)

(Assignment March 18, 2017)

CHAPTER VII - PRE-TRIAL

80. NPC vs. Adiong, 654 SCRA 391

(Effect of failure to conduct a pre-trial)

81. Agulto vs. Terson, 476 SCRA 395

(To whom Pre-Trial Order is served)

(Assignment April 6, 2017)

CHAPTER VIII - TRIAL, DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE AND JUDGMENT

82. AFP Mutual Benefit Assn. Inc. vs. RTC, Marikina City
642 SCRA 720, February 14, 2011
(Petition for Relief from Judgments (Rule 35) - Extrinsic fraud as ground for relief)

83. Diona vs. Balangue, 688 SCRA 2, January 7, 2013

(Annulment of Judgment as a Remedy)

84. Gochan vs. Mancao, G.R. No. 182314, November 13, 2013
(Extrinsic fraud as grounds for annulment)

85. Guzman vs. Guzman, 6393 SCRA 327, March 12, 2013
(Certiorari; its purpose)

86. Crisologo vs. JEWM Agro Industrial Corp.

G.R. No. 196897, March 3, 2014
(Certiorari not substitute to appeal)

CHAPTER X - EXECUTION AND SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENTS

87. Carbajosa vs. Patricio, A.M. No. MTJ-13-1834, October 2, 2013

(Ministerial nature of the duty of the issuance of writ of execution)

88. Reburiano vs. C.A., 301 SCRA 342, January 21, 1999
(Quashal of a writ of execution)

89. Heirs of Miranda, Sr. vs. Miranda, G.R. No. 179638, July 8, 2013
(Revival of Judgment)

90. GSIS vs. Prudential Guarantee & Assurance, Inc.

G.R. No. 165585, November 20, 2013
(Discretionary execution)

91. Leachon vs. Pascua, A.M. No. P-11-2972, September 28, 2011
(Levy upon property of the judgment debtor)

92. Sarmiento vs. Mendiola, A.M. No. P-07-2383, December 15, 2010
(Money judgments are enforceable only against property of judgment debtor)

93. Ching vs. Family Savings Bank, 634 SCRA 586, November 15, 2010
(Effect of Levy and Sale of Property)

94. Calaunan vs. Madolaria, A.M. No. P-10-2810, 642 SCRA, February 8, 2011
(Execution for a judgment for the delivery or restitution of real property)

95. Barrete vs. Amila,MTJ-92-733, 230 SCRA 219, February 23, 1994
(Contempt not a remedy against a judgment debtor who refuses to comply writ)

96. Villasi vs. Garcia, G.R. No. 190106, January 15, 2014
(Proceedings when property levied upon is claimed by 3rd persons (terceria)

97. Imano vs. METROBANK, 635 SCRA 357

(Proceedings when property levied upon is claimed by 3rd persons (terceria)

98. Esguerra vs. Holcim, Phil. Inc., G.R. No. 182571, September 2, 2013
(Remedy when judgment is unsatisfied)

(Assignment April 29, 2017)

PART I - PROVISIONAL REMEDIES

99. Banco-Espaol Filipino vs. Palanca, 37 Phil 921;

(Nature of attachment)

100. Davao Light vs. CA, 204 SCRA 343

(Nature of attachment)

101. K.O. Glass Construction Co. Inc. vs. Valenzuela, 116 SCRA 563, 567)
(Discretion of the Court in granting attachment)

102. PCIB vs. Alejandro, 533 SCRA 738

(Purposes of Preliminary Attachment)

103. China Banking Corp. vs. Asian Construction & Dev. Corp., 550 SCRA 585
(Conditions of applicant bond)

104. Mindanao Savings & Loan Assn. Inc. vs. CA, April 18, 1989
(Hearing not required on an application for preliminary attachment)

105. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas vs. Langanan, 637 SCRA 475

(Attachment of property in custodian legis)

106. Cheng vs. CA, 423 SCRA 354

(Remedies of a third person; terceria)

107. China Banking Corp. vs. Ciriaco

(Nature of Prleiminary Injunction; Requirements for Issuance)

108. Sy vs. Autobus Transport System, Inc., G.R. No. 176898, December 3,
2012
(Judicial discretion)

109. BP Phil. Inc. vs. Clark Trading Corp., G.R. No. 175284, September 19,
2012
(Diction of Injunction as a main action from preliminary injunction)

110. Sps. Nisce vs. Equitable PCI-Bank, 516 SCRA 231, 254
(Quantum of Evidence required)

111. Padilla vs. Asuncion, A.M. No. 06-44-CA-J, 518 SCRA 512
(Duration of TRO)

112. Nerwin Industries Corp. vs. PNO C-Energy Dev. Corp.; 669 SCRA 173,
April 11, 2012
(No TRO/Writ of injunction against govt. contract or project)

113. Medina vs. Canoy, 663 SCRA 424

(Injunction cannot be issued to transfer possessor or control of a property to
another when the legal title is still in dispute)

114. Commodities Storage & Ice Plant Corp. vs. CA, 274 SCRA 439
(Meaning of a receiver; appointment of a Party or Clerk of Court as a receiver)

115. BA Finance Corp. vs. CA, 258 SCRA 102

(Procedure for the application for replevin)

116. Advent Capital Corp. vs. Young, 655 SCRA 118, August 3, 2011
(Effect of dismissal of the complaint)

(Assignment May 6, 2017)

PART II - SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS

117. Pasricha vs. Don Luis Dizon Realty, Inc., 548 SCRA 273
(When interpleader is proper)

118. Social Justice Society vs. Lina, 574 SCRA 462

(Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies Rule 63)

119. Bayan Telecommunication Inc. vs. Republic, 513 SCRA 560

(Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies Rule 63)

120. Phil-Ville Development and Housing Corp. vs. Bonifacio, 651 SCRA 327,
June 8, 2011
(No execution or ordinary action)

121. Lokin vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 193808, June 26, 2012
(Review and Judgment and Final Order or Resolution of COMELEC & COA -
Fresh period rule does not apply)

122. Catindig vs. Vda. de Meneses, 641 SCRA 350, February 2, 2011
(Rule 65 - Certiorari distinguished from Appeal)

123. Leynes vs. Former 10th Division of the Court of Appeals, 640 SCRA 25-39-
41, January 19, 2011
(Rule 65 - Certiorari distinguished from Appeal)

124. Spouses Yusay vs. Court of Appeals, 647 SCRA 269, April 6, 2011
(Prohibition)

125. de Castro vs. JBC, 615 SCRA 666, March 17, 2010
(Mandamus is not available against discretionary acts)

(Assignment May 8, 2017)

126. Municipality of Bian vs. Garcia, 180 SCRA 576

(Two stages of expropriation)

127. Traders Royal Bank vs. Castaares, 636 SCRA 519, December 6, 2010
(Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage - Dragnet clause or blanket mortgage
clause)

128. Huerta Alba Resort Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 339 SCRA 534
(Right of Redemption)

129. Laurel vs. Francisco, 1624 SCRA 1, July 6, 2010

(Rule 71 Contempt Purpose and nature of contempt proceeding)

130. Habawel vs. CTA 1st Division, 657 SCRA , September 7, 2011
(Rule 71 Contempt Purpose and nature of contempt proceeding)