ALFONSO HILADO, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. VICTORIAS MILLING CO, INC., AND CARLOS L. LOCSIN, DEFENDANTS, CARLOS L. LOCSIN, DEFENDANT AND APPELLEE.

Appeal taken by Alfonso Hilado, plaintiff in Civil Case No. 40745 of the
Court of First Instance of Manila, from an order of said court dismissing his
complaint as against Carlos L. Locsin, one of the defendants therein, for lack
of cause of action.

On July 11, 1959, appellant instituted said action against the Victorias
Milling Co., Inc. and Locsin, its President, to recover from them, jointly and
severally, the sums of P18,000.00 as actual damages, P200,000.00 as moral
damages, P50,000.00 as exemplary damages and P10,000.00 as attorney’s fees, plus
the costs of suit.

The complaint alleged in synthesis that sometime in the month of July or
August, 1956, Locsin, in his capacity as President of the Victorias Milling Co.,
Inc. offered appellant the position of Technical Assistant to the President of
the corporation, with a monthly salary of P1,500.00; that, at first, appellant
was not inclined to accept the offer because it meant transferring his residence
and family from Manila to Occidental Negros; that upon the insistence of Locsin,
coupled with an offer of a loan of P2,000.00, appellant was prevailed upon to
accept the offer, for which reason he resigned his position as chief of the
legal department of the Binalbagan-Isabela Sugar Co., Inc. and gave up his
teaching assignments in various universities in Manila; that on September 1,
1956, appellant assumed his new position as Technical Assistant to the President
of the Victorias’ Milling, Co., Inc. at a monthly salary of P1,500.00; that on
June 30, 1959, his employment thereat was unjustly terminated; that as a result
of his sudden and unexpected dismissal, he suffered damages.

Locsin moved to dismiss the complaint as against him on the ground that it
stated no cause of action, alleging that, in hiring appellant, he acted in an
official capacity as president of the corporation, and that, if at all,
appellant’s cause of action was only against the corporation which had a
personality separate and distinct from that of its stockholders and
officers.

In July 30, 1959, the trial court issued the appealed order. Appellant’s
motion for reconsideration having been denied, the present appeal was taken.

The only issue to be resolved is whether the facts alleged in the complaint
constitute a sufficient cause of action against appellee Locsin. After a careful
study thereof, we are inclined to believe that appellant’s allegation in
paragraph 3 of his complaint that Locsin, in his capacity as President of the
Victorias Milling Co., Inc., offered him the position of Technical Assistant to
the President, renders his cause of action against Locsin doubtful. It must be
observed furthermore that paragraph 9 of the complaint does not allege
specifically that the notice terminating appellant’s services was signed by
Locsin and if so, whether he signed it in his personal capacity or as President
of the corporation. In view of these circumstances, it can not be said that the
lower court was entirely wrong in dismissing the complaint as far as Locsin is
concerned.

We are of the opinion, however, that the deficiency of the complaint, insofar
as it purported to state a cause of action against Locsin, was one that may be
cured. Therefore, instead of dismissing the complaint as against said party, the
lower court should have given appellant a reasonable opportunity to amend his
complaint, if he so desired.

In conformity with what has been said heretofore, judgment is rendered
setting aside the order of dismissal and remanding the case below for further
proceedings in accordance with this decision.

Bengzon, C. J., Bautista Angelo, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Regala,
Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P. and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.