Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    De Guzman v. Ochoa 648 SCRA 677 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Lauriz Esquivel
    Petitioners filed a motion to dismiss a civil case against them, alleging the complaint did not state a cause of action. The trial court denied the motion. Petitioners filed a second motion to dismiss alleging a defect in the certification against forum shopping. The trial court and the Court of Appeals agreed that under the "omnibus motion rule", any defects not raised in the first motion to dismiss were waived. The Supreme Court held that a motion to dismiss is an omnibus motion that must raise all available objections, so any objections not included in the first motion are deemed waived.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    De Guzman v. Ochoa 648 SCRA 677 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Lauriz Esquivel
    5 views1 page
    Petitioners filed a motion to dismiss a civil case against them, alleging the complaint did not state a cause of action. The trial court denied the motion. Petitioners filed a second motion to dismiss alleging a defect in the certification against forum shopping. The trial court and the Court of Appeals agreed that under the "omnibus motion rule", any defects not raised in the first motion to dismiss were waived. The Supreme Court held that a motion to dismiss is an omnibus motion that must raise all available objections, so any objections not included in the first motion are deemed waived.

    Original Description:

    c

    Original Title

    De Guzman

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Petitioners filed a motion to dismiss a civil case against them, alleging the complaint did not state a cause of action. The trial court denied the motion. Petitioners filed a second motion to dismiss alleging a defect in the certification against forum shopping. The trial court and the Court of Appeals agreed that under the "omnibus motion rule", any defects not raised in the first motion to dismiss were waived. The Supreme Court held that a motion to dismiss is an omnibus motion that must raise all available objections, so any objections not included in the first motion are deemed waived.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    5 views1 page

    De Guzman v. Ochoa 648 SCRA 677 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Lauriz Esquivel
    Petitioners filed a motion to dismiss a civil case against them, alleging the complaint did not state a cause of action. The trial court denied the motion. Petitioners filed a second motion to dismiss alleging a defect in the certification against forum shopping. The trial court and the Court of Appeals agreed that under the "omnibus motion rule", any defects not raised in the first motion to dismiss were waived. The Supreme Court held that a motion to dismiss is an omnibus motion that must raise all available objections, so any objections not included in the first motion are deemed waived.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    De Guzman v.

    Ochoa
    648 SCRA 677

    Facts:
    Respondent spouses Cesar and Sylvia Ochoa, through respondent Araceli Azones, ostensibly acting as
    attorney-in-fact, filed an action in the RTC seeking the annulment of contract of mortgage, foreclosure
    sale, certificate of sale and damages.

    The petitioners as defendants in the civil case, filed a motion to dismiss, alleging the sole ground that the
    complaint did not state a cause of action. RTC denied the petition and at the same time set the civil case
    for pre-trial, directing the parties to submit their briefs. Petitioner filed a second motion to dismiss,
    alleging that the certification against forum shopping was not executed by the parties themselves.
    Respondents opposed the second motion to dismiss, RTC agreed with respondents. Petitioners filed MR
    but RTC denied. Petitioner went to CA via a petition for certiorari. CA denied for lack of merit, in its
    decision, it agreed with the RTC that following the omnibus motion rule, the defects of the complaint
    pointed out by the petitioners were deemed waived when they failed to raise it in their first motion to
    dismiss.

    Issue:
    Whether the ‘omnibus motion rule’ will apply.

    Held:
    Yes. An order denying a motion to dismiss is an interlocutory order which neither terminates the case nor
    finally disposes of it as it leaves something to be done by the court before the case is finally decided on
    the merits. An order denying such may only be reviewed in the ordinary course of law by an appeal from
    the judgment after trial.
    Only in exceptional cases where the denial of the motion to dismiss is tainted with grave abuse of
    discretion that the court allows the extraordinary remedy of certiorari.
    A motion to dismiss is an omnibus motion because it attacks a pleading, that is, the complaint. For this
    reason, a motion to dismiss, like any other omnibus motion must raise and include all objections available
    at the time of the filing of the motion because under Section 8, “all objections not so included shall be
    deemed waived.”

    You might also like