G.R. No. L-10886; April 18, 1958
LEONCIA E. STO. DOMINGO, ETC., ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. URBANA STO. DOMINGO, ET AL., defendants-appellees.

FACTS

Raymundo Sto. Domingo contracted two marriages. The first, with Juana Dilag, produced a daughter, Urbana Sto. Domingo. The second, with Pilar Evangelista, produced a daughter, Leoncia Sto. Domingo. Raymundo died on May 1, 1935. Before his death, he executed a deed of donation of his properties in favor of his daughter Urbana, which she accepted. After Raymundo’s death, Urbana sold the donated properties to Deogracias Matias, and a certificate of title was issued to him. A series of litigations followed seeking the annulment of the donation and sale. The first case (Civil Case No. 5315) was filed on August 28, 1936, by Pilar Evangelista (widow) in her own behalf and as guardian ad litem of her minor daughter Leoncia, against Urbana and Deogracias Matias, alleging the donation and sale were fictitious and void. This case was amicably settled, with plaintiffs receiving P1,000.00 by way of compromise. The settlement, which included an affidavit from Pilar acting in both capacities, was approved by the court and the case was dismissed. Twenty-two months later, on October 7, 1938, the same plaintiffs filed a second action for identical relief, which was dismissed without prejudice. Later, intestate proceedings were instituted for Raymundo’s estate, and the administrator filed a complaint for annulment based on the same grounds, which was dismissed for lack of legal capacity to sue. The present case was then instituted by the same widow, Pilar, in her personal capacity and as guardian ad litem of Leoncia, against the same defendants, seeking annulment on the same grounds of fraud and lack of consideration. The defendants moved to dismiss on the grounds, among others, that the cause of action was barred by a prior judgment.

ISSUE

Whether the present action is barred by the prior judgment in the first case (Civil Case No. 5315) which was dismissed after an amicable settlement approved by the court.

RULING

Yes, the present action is barred by a prior judgment. The first case involved the same parties and the same issues as the present case. The amicable settlement in that case was entered into by Pilar Evangelista not only in her personal capacity but also as the duly appointed guardian ad litem of her minor daughter, Leoncia. This settlement was considered and sanctioned by the court. Under the Rules of Court, a minor may sue or be sued through a guardian ad litem. While a guardian ad litem ordinarily cannot bind the minor without court approval, the settlement in the first case was expressly approved by the court. Therefore, the judgment based on that settlement became final and bars the subsequent action. The order of dismissal is affirmed.