G.R. No. L-13982; July 31, 1920
DIEGO DE LA VIÑA, petitioner, vs. ANTONIO VILLAREAL, as Auxiliary Judge of First Instance, and NARCISA GEOPANO, respondents.

FACTS:
On September 17, 1917, Narcisa Geopano filed a complaint for divorce against her husband, Diego de la Viña, in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo. She alleged that she was a resident of Iloilo, while the defendant was a resident of Negros Oriental. She further alleged that her husband had committed adultery, ejected her from their conjugal home, and that she was forced to live separately in Iloilo. In her complaint, she prayed for divorce, partition of conjugal property, and alimony. Subsequently, she filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to restrain the defendant from alienating or encumbering the conjugal property during the pendency of the suit. The respondent judge overruled the defendant’s demurrer challenging the court’s jurisdiction and granted the preliminary injunction. Diego de la Viña then filed this original petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court, arguing that the Court of First Instance of Iloilo lacked jurisdiction over the divorce case and that the judge exceeded his authority in issuing the injunction.

ISSUE:
1. Whether a married woman can acquire a residence or domicile separate from her husband during the marriage, thereby conferring jurisdiction on the court where she resides to hear her divorce action.
2. Whether, in an action for divorce where partition of conjugal property is also sought, the wife may obtain a preliminary injunction to restrain the husband from alienating or encumbering the conjugal property during the pendency of the action.

RULING:
1. Yes. While the general rule is that the domicile of the wife follows that of her husband, this rule admits exceptions. A wife may acquire a separate domicile for the purpose of filing a divorce action when the husband’s conduct provides lawful ground for divorce, such as adultery, and she is justified in leaving him. Since Narcisa Geopano alleged and was justified in leaving due to her husband’s adultery, she validly established a separate domicile in Iloilo. Therefore, the Court of First Instance of Iloilo had jurisdiction over the divorce case.

2. Yes. Under Section 164 of Act No. 190 (the Code of Civil Procedure), a preliminary injunction may be granted when the defendant is doing or threatens to do an act in violation of the plaintiff’s rights respecting the subject of the action, tending to render the judgment ineffectual. In a divorce action where the wife seeks partition of conjugal property, if the husband threatens to alienate or encumber that property to the wife’s prejudice, a preliminary injunction is a proper remedy to protect her eventual share. The respondent judge did not exceed his authority in granting the injunction.

The Supreme Court denied the petition, upholding the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo and the validity of the preliminary injunction. Costs were imposed on the petitioner.