Lawyerly

GR No. 152272

2012-03-05

JUANA COMPLEX I HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v. FIL-ESTATE LAND

MENDOZA, J.

The question of whether the complaint states a cause of action is determined by its averments regarding the acts committed by the defendant.[19] Thus, it must contain a concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts constituting the plaintiff's cause of action.[20] To be taken into account are only the material allegations in the complaint; extraneous facts and circumstances or other matters aliunde are not considered.[21]

GR No. 187326

2011-06-15

PHILIPPINE ARMY v. SPS. MAJOR CONSTANCIO PAMITTAN AND LEONOR PAMITTAN

CARPIO, J.

Generally, a motion to dismiss based on failure to state a cause of action hypothetically admits the truth of the allegations in the complaint and in order to sustain a dismissal based on lack of cause of action, the insufficiency of the cause of action must appear on the face of the complaint.[10] However, this rule is not without exception. Thus, a motion to dismiss "does not admit allegations of which the court will take judicial notice are not true, nor does the rule apply to legally impossible facts, nor to facts inadmissible in evidence, nor to facts which appear by record or document included in the pleadings to be unfounded."[11] Indeed, in some cases, the court may also consider, in addition to the complaint, other pleadings submitted by the parties and the annexes or documents appended to it.[12]

GR No. 151454

2010-08-08

HEIRS OF ANTONIO SANTOS v. HEIRS OF CRISPULO BERAMO

PERALTA, J.

When the ground for dismissal is that the complaint states no cause of action under Section 1 (g), Rule 16 of the Rules of Court, such fact must be determined from the allegations of the complaint.[14] In a motion to dismiss, a defendant hypothetically admits the truth of the material allegations of the plaintiff's complaint[15] for the purpose of resolving the motion.[16] The general rule is that the allegations in a complaint are sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the defendant, if, admitting the facts alleged, the court can render a valid judgment upon the same in accordance with the prayer therein.[17] To sustain a motion to dismiss for lack of cause of action, the complaint must show that the claim for relief does not exist.[18]

GR No. 168394

2008-10-06

AGRARIAN REFORM BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION v. LORETO G. NICOLAS

REYES, R.T., J.

The test of sufficiency of facts alleged in the complaint as constituting a cause of action is whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the court could render a valid verdict in accordance with the prayer of the complaint.[28] That in determining sufficiency of cause of action, the court takes into account only the material allegations of the complaint and no other, is not a hard and fast rule. In some cases, the court considers the documents attached to the complaint to truly determine sufficiency of cause of action.[29]

GR NO. 159648

2007-07-27

FLUOR DANIEL v. E.B. VILLAROSA

QUISUMBING, J.

It is, thus, only upon the occurrence of the last element that a cause of action arises, giving the plaintiff a right to file an action in court for recovery of damages or other relief.[13] The test of sufficiency of facts alleged in the complaint as constituting a cause of action is whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the court could render a valid verdict in accordance with the prayer of the complaint.[14] That in determining sufficiency of cause of action, the court takes into account only the material allegations of the complaint and no other, is not a hard and fast rule. In some cases, the court considers the documents attached to the complaint to truly determine sufficiency of cause of action.[15]

GR NO. 162927

2007-03-06

MARCELINO B. AGOY v. CA

QUISUMBING, J.

On the first issue, we find that the trial court's dismissal of the complaint for lack of cause of action was proper. The nature of an action is determined by the material averments in the complaint and the character of the relief sought. The complaint must contain a concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts constituting the plaintiff's cause of action.[16] A cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates the right of another.[17] Its essential elements are as follows: A right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under whatever law it arises or is created;

GR NO. 149468

2006-10-23

MARIE IOLE NACUA-JAO v. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

To determine if a complaint states a cause of action, the test is whether, admitting the truth of the facts alleged therein, the court may render a valid judgment in accordance with the prayer. If the answer is "no," the complaint does not state a cause of action and should be dismissed forthwith. If "yes," then it does and must be given due course.[22] What are considered, however, are only the material allegations in the complaint, the appended annexes or documents and other pleadings of the plaintiff, or the admissions in the records.[23] Extraneous facts and circumstances are not taken into account.[24]

GR NO. 163088

2006-07-20

PHILIPPINE COCONUT AUTHORITY v. PRIMEX COCO PRODUCTS

CALLEJO, SR., J.

On its face, the petition of respondent for mandamus does not state a cause of action for a writ of mandamus. The rule is that a cause of action has the following elements: (a) the legal right of the plaintiff; (b) the correlative obligation of the defendant to respect that legal right; and (c) an act or omission of the defendant that violates such right.[46] The cause of action does not accrue until the party obligated refuses, expressly or impliedly, to comply with its duty.[47]

GR NO. 147058

2006-03-10

DAVAO LIGHT v. JUDGE OF RTC DAVAO CITY

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

The nature of an action is determined by the material averments in the complaint and the character of the relief sought.[18] In this case, the complaint filed in Civil Case No. 25,086-97 sufficiently established a case for DAMAGES, and not specific performance. Neither is it an action for consignation. This is evident from the reading of the allegations in the complaint and the reliefs prayed for. The complaint principally sought an award of moral, nominal and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's fees and litigation expenses, for the alleged damages suffered by respondents by reason of petitioner's disconnection of their electrical service. The allegations regarding the consignation with the court of the amounts due to petitioner are mere factual premises from which respondents are basing their theory that petitioner's disconnection of the electrical service and removal of the electric meter was unjustified. Also, the relief sought by respondents for the RTC to order petitioner to delete the amount of P9,633.32 from their account is merely incidental to their claim for damages. It is not the main cause of their claim.

GR No. 162461

2005-11-23

AMOS P. FRANCIA v. POWER MERGE CORPORATION

CARPIO MORALES, J.

In a motion to dismiss, a defendant hypothetically admits the truth of the material allegations of the plaintiff's complaint. This hypothetical admission extends to relevant and material facts pleaded in, and the inferences fairly deducible from, the complaint. Hence, to determine whether the sufficiency of the facts alleged in the complaint constitutes a cause of action, the test is as follows: admitting the truth of the facts alleged, can the court render a valid judgment in accordance with the prayer?[18] (Emphasis supplied)

GR No. 154554

2005-11-09

GOODYEAR PHILIPPINES v. ANTHONY SY

PANGANIBAN, J.

A cause of action is a formal statement of the operative facts that give rise to a remedial right.[8] The question of whether the complaint states a cause of action is determined by its averments regarding the acts committed by the defendant.[9] Thus, it "must contain a concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts constituting the plaintiff's cause of action."[10] Failure to make a sufficient allegation of a cause of action in the complaint "warrants its dismissal."[11]

	GR No. 152272 2012-03-05	JUANA COMPLEX I HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v. FIL-ESTATE LAND MENDOZA, J.
The question of whether the complaint states a cause of action is determined by its averments regarding the acts committed by the defendant.[19] Thus, it must contain a concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts constituting the plaintiff's cause of action.[20] To be taken into account are only the material allegations in the complaint; extraneous facts and circumstances or other matters aliunde are not considered.[21]
	GR No. 187326 2011-06-15	PHILIPPINE ARMY v. SPS. MAJOR CONSTANCIO PAMITTAN AND LEONOR PAMITTAN CARPIO, J.
Generally, a motion to dismiss based on failure to state a cause of action hypothetically admits the truth of the allegations in the complaint and in order to sustain a dismissal based on lack of cause of action, the insufficiency of the cause of action must appear on the face of the complaint.[10] However, this rule is not without exception. Thus, a motion to dismiss "does not admit allegations of which the court will take judicial notice are not true, nor does the rule apply to legally impossible facts, nor to facts inadmissible in evidence, nor to facts which appear by record or document included in the pleadings to be unfounded."[11] Indeed, in some cases, the court may also consider, in addition to the complaint, other pleadings submitted by the parties and the annexes or documents appended to it.[12]
	GR No. 151454 2010-08-08	HEIRS OF ANTONIO SANTOS v. HEIRS OF CRISPULO BERAMO PERALTA, J.
When the ground for dismissal is that the complaint states no cause of action under Section 1 (g), Rule 16 of the Rules of Court, such fact must be determined from the allegations of the complaint.[14] In a motion to dismiss, a defendant hypothetically admits the truth of the material allegations of the plaintiff's complaint[15] for the purpose of resolving the motion.[16] The general rule is that the allegations in a complaint are sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the defendant, if, admitting the facts alleged, the court can render a valid judgment upon the same in accordance with the prayer therein.[17] To sustain a motion to dismiss for lack of cause of action, the complaint must show that the claim for relief does not exist.[18]
	GR No. 168394 2008-10-06	AGRARIAN REFORM BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION v. LORETO G. NICOLAS REYES, R.T., J.
The test of sufficiency of facts alleged in the complaint as constituting a cause of action is whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the court could render a valid verdict in accordance with the prayer of the complaint.[28] That in determining sufficiency of cause of action, the court takes into account only the material allegations of the complaint and no other, is not a hard and fast rule. In some cases, the court considers the documents attached to the complaint to truly determine sufficiency of cause of action.[29]
	GR NO. 159648 2007-07-27	FLUOR DANIEL v. E.B. VILLAROSA QUISUMBING, J.
It is, thus, only upon the occurrence of the last element that a cause of action arises, giving the plaintiff a right to file an action in court for recovery of damages or other relief.[13] The test of sufficiency of facts alleged in the complaint as constituting a cause of action is whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the court could render a valid verdict in accordance with the prayer of the complaint.[14] That in determining sufficiency of cause of action, the court takes into account only the material allegations of the complaint and no other, is not a hard and fast rule. In some cases, the court considers the documents attached to the complaint to truly determine sufficiency of cause of action.[15]
	GR NO. 162927 2007-03-06	MARCELINO B. AGOY v. CA QUISUMBING, J.
On the first issue, we find that the trial court's dismissal of the complaint for lack of cause of action was proper. The nature of an action is determined by the material averments in the complaint and the character of the relief sought. The complaint must contain a concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts constituting the plaintiff's cause of action.[16] A cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates the right of another.[17] Its essential elements are as follows: A right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under whatever law it arises or is created;
	GR NO. 149468 2006-10-23	MARIE IOLE NACUA-JAO v. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
To determine if a complaint states a cause of action, the test is whether, admitting the truth of the facts alleged therein, the court may render a valid judgment in accordance with the prayer. If the answer is "no," the complaint does not state a cause of action and should be dismissed forthwith. If "yes," then it does and must be given due course.[22] What are considered, however, are only the material allegations in the complaint, the appended annexes or documents and other pleadings of the plaintiff, or the admissions in the records.[23] Extraneous facts and circumstances are not taken into account.[24]
	GR NO. 163088 2006-07-20	PHILIPPINE COCONUT AUTHORITY v. PRIMEX COCO PRODUCTS CALLEJO, SR., J.
On its face, the petition of respondent for mandamus does not state a cause of action for a writ of mandamus. The rule is that a cause of action has the following elements: (a) the legal right of the plaintiff; (b) the correlative obligation of the defendant to respect that legal right; and (c) an act or omission of the defendant that violates such right.[46] The cause of action does not accrue until the party obligated refuses, expressly or impliedly, to comply with its duty.[47]
	GR NO. 147058 2006-03-10	DAVAO LIGHT v. JUDGE OF RTC DAVAO CITY AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The nature of an action is determined by the material averments in the complaint and the character of the relief sought.[18] In this case, the complaint filed in Civil Case No. 25,086-97 sufficiently established a case for DAMAGES, and not specific performance. Neither is it an action for consignation. This is evident from the reading of the allegations in the complaint and the reliefs prayed for. The complaint principally sought an award of moral, nominal and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's fees and litigation expenses, for the alleged damages suffered by respondents by reason of petitioner's disconnection of their electrical service. The allegations regarding the consignation with the court of the amounts due to petitioner are mere factual premises from which respondents are basing their theory that petitioner's disconnection of the electrical service and removal of the electric meter was unjustified. Also, the relief sought by respondents for the RTC to order petitioner to delete the amount of P9,633.32 from their account is merely incidental to their claim for damages. It is not the main cause of their claim.
	GR No. 162461 2005-11-23	AMOS P. FRANCIA v. POWER MERGE CORPORATION CARPIO MORALES, J.
In a motion to dismiss, a defendant hypothetically admits the truth of the material allegations of the plaintiff's complaint. This hypothetical admission extends to relevant and material facts pleaded in, and the inferences fairly deducible from, the complaint. Hence, to determine whether the sufficiency of the facts alleged in the complaint constitutes a cause of action, the test is as follows: admitting the truth of the facts alleged, can the court render a valid judgment in accordance with the prayer?[18] (Emphasis supplied)
	GR No. 154554 2005-11-09	GOODYEAR PHILIPPINES v. ANTHONY SY PANGANIBAN, J.
A cause of action is a formal statement of the operative facts that give rise to a remedial right.[8] The question of whether the complaint states a cause of action is determined by its averments regarding the acts committed by the defendant.[9] Thus, it "must contain a concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts constituting the plaintiff's cause of action."[10] Failure to make a sufficient allegation of a cause of action in the complaint "warrants its dismissal."[11]

RAMON R. JIMENEZ JR. v. JUAN JOSE JORDANA