G.R. No. L-17152; November 30, 1962
Mindanao Realty Corporation, plaintiff-appellant, vs. Filomeno Kintanar, Eladio Enriquez, Bartolome Fernandez, personally and as Chairman and Members, respectively, of the Board of Liquidators, The Register of Deeds, The Provincial Sheriff, both of the Province of Davao and The Republic of the Philippines, defendants-appellees.

FACTS

Mindanao Realty Corporation filed an action to quiet title over three parcels of land in the Court of First Instance of Davao. The properties, originally registered to Tadeo Nambu and later acquired by the plaintiff, had been seized by the Alien Property Custodian via Vesting Order No. P-2 as alleged enemy assets of the Furukawa Plantation Company. The Republic of the Philippines claimed ownership, and the Board of Liquidators was involved in administering the properties. The defendants included the Republic, the Board’s Chairman and members (Kintanar, Enriquez, and Fernandez) sued both officially and personally, and other officials.
The Republic and the Board members, through the Solicitor General, moved to dismiss the complaint on multiple grounds, including immunity from suit and lack of cause of action. Separately, defendants Kintanar, Enriquez, and Fernandez moved to dismiss the complaint against them in their private and personal capacities, arguing the allegations did not support personal liability. The trial court granted this latter motion, dismissing the complaint against these individuals in their personal capacities. Mindanao Realty Corporation appealed this order.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly dismissed the complaint against defendants Kintanar, Enriquez, and Fernandez in their private and personal capacities for lack of cause of action.

RULING

Yes, the trial court’s dismissal is affirmed. The Supreme Court held that a public official may be sued in their personal capacity only when the complaint alleges they acted maliciously, in bad faith, or outside the scope of their official authority. The complaint must contain specific factual averments supporting personal liability. In this case, the appellant’s complaint failed to meet this standard.
Examining the allegations, the Court found that all acts attributed to Kintanar, Enriquez, and Fernandez were performed in their official capacities as Chairman and members of the Board of Liquidators. There was no assertion that they committed any wrongful act in their private, individual capacities. The prayer for relief in the complaint also did not seek any specific remedy against them personally. The Court clarified that while a suit against officials in their official capacity is not automatically a suit against the state requiring consent, liability in such a suit remains official. Personal liability requires a distinct, well-pleaded claim of ultra vires or tortious conduct. Since the complaint lacked such allegations, no valid cause of action existed against them in their private capacities. The dismissal on that specific ground was therefore proper.