GR L 2934; (October, 1906) (Digest)
Digest: G.R. No. L-2934 (Juan Molina, Administrator of the Estate of Anastasio Mora v. La Electricista)
FACTS:
1. Plaintiff-Appellant: Juan Molina, administrator of the estate of Anastasio Mora, filed a complaint against Defendant-Appellee La Electricista for damages amounting to 6,000 pesos due to Mora’s death, allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence.
2. Defendant’s Action: La Electricista filed a demurrer (a motion to dismiss) on the ground that the complaint failed to state a sufficient cause of action.
3. Lower Court Ruling (July 24, 1905): The court sustained the demurrer and dismissed the case without giving the plaintiff an opportunity to amend the complaint.
4. Plaintiff’s Motion: Molina excepted to the ruling and later moved to amend his complaint (July 28 and August 17, 1905). The court denied his motion (August 26, 1905).
ISSUE:
1. Whether the lower court erred in dismissing the case without allowing the plaintiff to amend his complaint under Section 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
RULING:
1. Reversal of Lower Court’s Decision: The Supreme Court ruled that the lower court erred in dismissing the case outright.
– Under Section 101, when a demurrer is sustained, the plaintiff must be given a chance to amend the pleading within a reasonable time.
– The lower court should not have dismissed the case without allowing Molina to amend his complaint.
2. Remedy Granted: The Supreme Court reversed the dismissal and granted Molina five days to amend his complaint.
3. Effect of Plaintiff’s Actions: The Court noted that Molina’s attempt to amend his complaint after the demurrer was sustained implied acceptance of the ruling on the demurrer, but this did not waive his right to appeal the denial of his motion to amend.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
– The order of dismissal was reversed.
– Molina was given five days to amend his complaint.
– The case was remanded to the lower court for further proceedings.
Concurring Justices: Arellano, C.J., Torres, Johnson, Carson, Willard, and Tracey.
(Note: The case was decided on October 26, 1906.)