G.R. No. L-17799; May 9, 1922
SMITH, BELL & COMPANY, LTD., plaintiff-appellee, vs. BRUNA MANGAHAS, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Smith, Bell & Company filed a complaint against Bruna Mangahas in the justice of the peace court of Manila. Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant appealed to the Court of First Instance. The clerk of court notified both parties of the docketing of the appeal, as required by law. The plaintiff filed its complaint in the Court of First Instance, and a copy was received by the defendant’s attorney. The defendant failed to answer the complaint. The plaintiff moved to declare the defendant in default, which the court granted, rendering judgment against her. The defendant moved for reconsideration, arguing that she was not served with a summons in the Court of First Instance, and therefore the court did not acquire jurisdiction to declare her in default. The motion was denied, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE

Whether, on appeal by a defendant from a judgment of a justice of the peace court to a Court of First Instance, the defendant must be served with a summons.

RULING

No. Service of a formal summons on the defendant-appellant is unnecessary. The defendant, by perfecting the appeal, voluntarily brought the case to the Court of First Instance. The notification from the clerk of court regarding the docketing of the appeal, coupled with the defendant’s receipt of a copy of the plaintiff’s complaint filed in the higher court, constitutes sufficient notice and is equivalent to an appearance. The defendant, having initiated the appeal, cannot claim lack of notice of the pendency of the action. Therefore, the Court of First Instance properly acquired jurisdiction to declare the defendant in default for failure to answer the complaint. The judgment is affirmed.