G.R. No. 26386 , March 30, 1927
MOODY, ARONSON & CO., plaintiff-appellant, vs. HOTEL BILBAO, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

Moody, Aronson & Co. filed a complaint in the justice of the peace court of Iloilo to recover P455.76 from Hotel Bilbao. The judgment favored the defendant, prompting the plaintiff to appeal to the Court of First Instance (CFI). In the CFI, after the plaintiff presented its evidence, the defendant made an oral motion to dismiss. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint. The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court, where the Second Division reversed the CFI’s decision and entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the claimed amount. Following this reversal, the defendant filed a motion for reconsideration, praying that the case be remanded to the trial court to allow it to present its evidence in defense.

ISSUE

Whether a defendant, whose motion to dismiss after the plaintiff rests its case is granted by the trial court but later reversed on appeal, is entitled to present its evidence in defense upon remand of the case.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, denied the defendant’s motion. The Court ruled that a defendant who, after the plaintiff has presented its evidence, submits a motion to dismiss and elects to stand on the insufficiency of the plaintiff’s case, cannot later be permitted to present evidence if the dismissal is reversed on appeal. This principle, previously applied in criminal and election cases, is extended to ordinary civil actions to avoid unnecessary and protracted litigation. The Court emphasized that its rules should aim for the speedy disposition of cases and prevent lengthy legal proceedings. Consequently, the judgment in favor of the plaintiff stands, and the case will not be remanded for the presentation of the defendant’s evidence.