G.R. No. 85455 June 2, 1994
EDITH JUINIO ATIENZA, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. SERGIO PESTANO, SALVADORA ATIENZA and MARIA BEATRIZ ATIENZA, respondents.

FACTS

Andres Atienza died intestate on June 26, 1987, leaving as heirs his mother Salvadora Atienza, his widow Edith Juinio Atienza, and his adopted daughter Maria Beatriz Atienza. On September 21, 1987, Salvadora and Maria Beatriz filed Civil Case No. V-5456 for damages, accounting, and partition against Edith in the Regional Trial Court of Roxas City. They alleged that Edith used a fake birth certificate for Maria Beatriz to claim insurance, retirement, and other benefits, thereby depriving Salvadora of her share in the estate. Instead of filing an answer, Edith filed SP Proc. No. Q-52510 for the issuance of letters of administration of the estate in the Quezon City Court. She then filed a Motion to Dismiss the Roxas City case on the ground of litis pendentia, claiming the Quezon City proceeding involved the same parties and action. Respondent Judge Sergio Pestano denied the Motion to Dismiss, appointed Salvadora as guardian ad litem for Maria Beatriz, and also denied the Motion for Reconsideration. Edith filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with the Court of Appeals, which was dismissed. Her Motion for Reconsideration was also denied, prompting the elevation of the case to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether or not litis pendentia obtains in Civil Case No. V-5456 (Roxas City) and in SP Proc. No. Q-52510 (Quezon City), warranting the dismissal of the Roxas City case.

RULING

No, litis pendentia does not obtain. The requisites for litis pendentia are: (1) identity of parties or interests; (2) identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, founded on the same facts; and (3) identity such that a judgment in the pending case would constitute res judicata in the other. These requisites are not all present. While the parties are the same heirs, the causes of action are different. Civil Case No. V-5456 is principally an action for damages arising from alleged tortious acts, with accounting and partition as incidents. SP Proc. No. Q-52510 is a special proceeding for the intestate estate administration. A decision in the damage suit would not constitute res judicata in the administration proceeding. Furthermore, the Roxas City case was filed first, and the Quezon City proceeding was filed later as an apparent afterthought to evade potential liability. The Court also noted that an order denying a motion to dismiss is merely interlocutory and cannot be the basis for a petition for certiorari; the proper remedy is an appeal after a final judgment on the merits. The petition was denied and the Court of Appeals’ decision was affirmed.