GR 42699 42709; (May, 1981) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. L-42699 to L-42709. May 26, 1981.
The Heirs of the Late Florentina Nuguid Vda. de Haberer, petitioner, vs. Court of Appeals, Federico Martinez, et al., respondents.
FACTS
This case originated from complaints for recovery of possession filed by Florentina Nuguid Vda. de Haberer against private respondents. The lower court dismissed the complaints, and the decision was appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court had previously reinstated the appeal after the appellate court erroneously dismissed it on procedural grounds. Upon remand, the appellate court granted appellant a 90-day extension to file her brief. During this period, appellant Florentina Nuguid Vda. de Haberer died. Her counsel notified the court of her death and sought a suspension of the period to file the brief pending the appointment of an estate executor, citing the uncertainty of whether they would be retained by the heirs.
The appellate court, however, denied further extension and dismissed the appeal for failure to file the appellant’s brief within the extended period. Counsel for the deceased appellant filed a motion for reconsideration, explaining their ethical dilemma and submitting a printed brief, but the appellate court denied it.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals acted with grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the appeal due to the failure to file the appellant’s brief following the death of the party-appellant.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court ruled that the Court of Appeals committed a grave error of law. Upon the death of a party, the claim is not extinguished, and the court must order the legal representative to appear and be substituted for the deceased pursuant to Rule 3, Section 17 of the Rules of Court. The duty to order substitution is mandatory and rests upon the court. The appellate court erred in dismissing the appeal for non-filing of the brief without first ordering the substitution of the deceased party. The death of a client does not automatically terminate the attorney-client relationship for all purposes; counsel have a duty to inform the court of the death and to take steps to protect the interests of the deceased until substitution is effected. The dismissal was premature and circumvented the mandatory substitution process. The Supreme Court set aside the resolutions of dismissal and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals to proceed with the substitution of the proper parties and to determine the appeal on its merits.