ENRIQUE A. DEFANTE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, VS. HON. ANTONIO E. RODRIGUEZ, ATTY. RODOLFO E. MATEO, FRANCISCO TEJONES, LORETO TORRES AND WILFREDO MONTES, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

Defante versus Rodriguez

The Case

This is an action for damages arising from an alleged forcible entry and the demolition of improvements, brought by Enrique A. Defante against a municipal judge and the persons who carried out a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction. The case matters to the Bar candidate because it is a study in the fate of an appeal that events overtake: the plaintiff dies, his heirs lose interest, and the defendants themselves concede that the appeal has become moot. It teaches the discipline of asking, before arguing the merits, whether there is still a live controversy for the Court to decide.

Procedural History

The Municipality of Las Piñas sued Defante for forcible entry before the municipal court of Las Piñas. In that ejectment case, Municipal Judge Antonio E. Rodriguez issued a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction, and the writ was later enforced against Defante. Defante then filed an action for damages in the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Pasay City Branch VII, against Judge Rodriguez and the persons who ejected him. The defendants moved to dismiss on the grounds of lack of cause of action and lack of jurisdiction, and Judge Rodriguez adopted that motion. Judge Francisco de la Rosa dismissed the complaint on the ground that it was intimately connected with the ejectment suit pending in the municipal court of Las Piñas. Defante appealed the order of dismissal to the Supreme Court on the ground that it is contrary to law. The parties filed their briefs, and the appeal was submitted for decision. Later, in compliance with a resolution of the Court, counsel for Defante manifested that Defante had died and that his heirs were no longer interested in prosecuting the appeal, while the defendants manifested that the appeal had become moot.

Facts

On October 20, 1964, the Municipality of Las Piñas sued Enrique A. Defante for alleged forcible entry into a lot owned by the municipal corporation. In that ejectment case, Municipal Judge Antonio E. Rodriguez issued a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction enjoining Defante from further occupying the eastern portion of the lot.

Acting on Judge Rodriguez's order of December 20, 1966, the writ was enforced against Defante the following day, December 21, by Atty. Rodolfo E. Mateo, Francisco Tejones, Loreto Torres and Wilfredo Montes. Defante was ejected from the lot, and his improvements were allegedly demolished.

On January 21, 1967, Defante filed an action for damages against Judge Rodriguez and the four persons who had ejected him. The complaint was dismissed, and Defante appealed. While the appeal was pending, Defante died, and his heirs informed the Court that they were no longer interested in prosecuting the appeal. The defendants likewise manifested that the appeal had become moot.

Issues

• Whether or not the appeal may still be decided on the merits after the death of the plaintiff-appellant and the manifestation of his heirs that they are no longer interested in prosecuting the appeal.
• Whether or not the appeal has become moot and must therefore be dismissed.

Applicable Provisions

The decision does not quote or construe any statutory provision. It rests on the procedural consequence of mootness, that is, the absence of a live controversy once the appellant has died and his heirs have abandoned the appeal. No provision is therefore quoted here, because none appears in the text of the decision.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court did not reach the merits of the order of dismissal. Counsel for Defante informed the Court that Defante is dead and that, in view of the developments in a registration case regarding the land involved in the ejectment case, Defante's heirs are no longer interested in prosecuting the appeal.

On the second issue, the Court held that the appeal had become moot. The defendants themselves manifested that the appeal had become moot in view of Defante's appeal in the ejectment suit and because of his death. With no party pressing the appeal and no live controversy remaining, the Court dismissed it.

Doctrine

An appeal becomes moot when the appellant dies and his heirs manifest that they are no longer interested in prosecuting it, and when the defendants themselves concede that no live controversy remains. A court will not resolve the merits of a moot appeal; it dismisses the appeal. The rule for the Bar answer is simple: mootness is a ground for dismissal, and the death of the appellant coupled with the abandonment of the appeal by his heirs renders the appeal moot.

Disposition

The appeal was dismissed, with no costs against either party.

Remember This

The single line worth memorizing is that a moot appeal is dismissed, not decided. Examiners use this case to test whether a candidate will argue the merits of a dead controversy instead of recognizing that the death of the appellant and the abandonment of the appeal by his heirs leave nothing for the Court to resolve.