Samonte Vs Naguiat Rule38

Samonte vs Naguiat Ruling: Yes.
S.F. Naguiat, Inc., filed a complaint for collection  Sections 1 and 3 of Rule 38 of the Rules
of sum of money against SB Traders and of Court provide the requirements for a
Samonte with Branch 9 of the Regional Trial petition for relief from judgment, thus:
Court (RTC) of Malolos, Bulacan.
SEC. 1. Petition for relief from
It alleged that SB Traders incurred an obligation judgment, order, or other proceedings.
to pay the total sum of ₱1,105,143.27 arising – When a judgment or final order is
from the sale of Mobil Oil products. It further entered, or any other proceeding is
averred that SB Traders was merely an alter ego thereafter taken against a party in any
of Samonte and that it was operating for his court through fraud, accident, mistake,
sole benefit. or excusable negligence, he may file a
petition in such court and in the same
In the Answer of Samonte, he claimed that he case praying that the judgment, order
was not acting in his personal capacity and was or proceeding be set aside.
merely acting for and in behalf of SB Traders;
that SB Traders never denied its obligation to  SEC. 3. Time for filing of petition;
pay for the purchases it made with S.F Naguiat contents and verification.— A petition
but was merely requesting for more time to for in either of the preceding sections of
settle its accounts; and that to effect payment this rule must be verified, filed within
for the subject amount, it had already issued sixty (60) days after the petitioner
postdated checks of ₱25,000.00 per month learns of the judgment, order, or other
covering the period from June to December proceeding to be set aside, and not
1999 . more than six (6) months after such
judgment or order was entered, or such
Samonte failed to appeal the said decision. proceeding was taken; and must be
Thereafter, on motion, Naguiat ordered the accompanied with affidavits showing
issuance of a writ of execution on July 30, 2001. the fraud, accident, mistake, or
On August 22, 2001, Samonte filed a petition excusable negligence relied upon, and
for relief from judgment on the ground that the the facts constituting the petitioner's
RTC made serious and prejudicial mistakes in good and substantial cause of action
appreciating the evidence presented. or defense, as the case may be.
RTC denied the Petition for relief from  Relief from judgment under Rule 38 of
judgment on the grounds that the motion failed the Rules of Court is a remedy provided
to comply with the mandatory requirements of by law to any person against whom a
sections 4 and 5 of Rule 15 of the 1997 Rules of decision or order is entered into
Civil procedure and that it failed to raise an through fraud, accident, mistake or
issue which would warrant a modification or excusable negligence. The relief
reversal of the order. provided for is of equitable character,
Issue: WON the dismissal of the petition for allowed only in exceptional cases as
relief from judgment by the RTC was proper.
where there is no other available or
adequate remedy.
 Section 3, Rule 38 of the Rules of Court

requires that the petition must be
accompanied with affidavits of merits
showing the fraud, accident, mistake, or
excusable negligence relied upon by
petitioner and the facts constituting the
petitioner's good and substantial cause
of action or defense as the case maybe.
 While a petition for relief without a

separate affidavit of merit is sufficient
where facts constituting petitioners
substantial cause of action or defense,
as the case may be, are alleged in a
verified petition since the oath elevates
the petition to the same category as a
separate affidavit, the petition for relief
filed by petitioner was not even
verified.
 Going by the tenor of the aforequoted

Rule, it is the sense of this Court that
the petition under consideration cannot
prosper, given the grounds therefor
which should have been raised, more
appropriately, in a simple motion for
reconsideration.

Samonte Vs Naguiat Rule38

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Samonte Vs Naguiat Rule38

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Samonte Vs Naguiat Rule38

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Samonte vs Naguiat Ruling: Yes.

 Section 3, Rule 38 of the Rules of Court

 While a petition for relief without a

 Going by the tenor of the aforequoted

You might also like