Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

DOTMATRIX TRADING v. ROMMEL B. LEGASPI UNDER NAME

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 173331 2013-12-11	FLORPINA BENAVIDEZ v. NESTOR SALVADOR MENDOZA, J.
In the relatively recent case of Dotmatrix Trading v. Legaspi,[24] the Court had the occasion to extensively discuss the various rules and consideration in determining which case to dismiss in such situations. It included its analysis of Abines. Thus:Early on, we applied the principle of Qui prior est tempore, potior est jure (literally, he who is before in time is better in right) in dismissing a case on the ground of litis pendentia. This was exemplified in the relatively early case of Del Rosario v. Jacinto where two complaints for reconveyance and/or recovery of the same parcel of land were filed by substantially the same parties, with the second case only impleading more party-plaintiffs. The Court held that "parties who base their contention upon the same rights as the litigants in a previous suit are bound by the judgment in the latter case." Without expressly saying so in litis pendentia terms, the Court gave priority to the suit filed earlier.
	GR No. 197937 2013-04-03	FILM DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF PHILIPPINES v. SM PRIME HOLDINGS VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Litis pendentia, as a ground for the dismissal of a civil action, refers to a situation where two actions are pending between the same parties for the same cause of action, so that one of them becomes unnecessary and vexatious.[21] It is based on the policy against multiplicity of suits[22] and authorizes a court to dismiss a case motu proprio.[23]
	GR No. 170787 2012-09-12	CRISPINO PANGILINAN v. JOCELYN N. BALATBAT PERALTA, J.
Dotmatrix Trading v. Legaspi[40] explained the meaning and elements of litis pendentia, thus: Litis pendentia is a Latin term, which literally means "a pending suit" and is variously referred to in some decisions as lis pendens and auter action pendant. As a ground for the dismissal of a civil action, it refers to the situation where two actions are pending between the same parties for the same cause of action, so that one of them becomes unnecessary and vexatious. It is based on the policy against multiplicity of suits.
	GR No. 181485 2012-02-15	PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. GATEWAY PROPERTY HOLDINGS LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
As we held in Dotmatrix Trading v. Legaspi,[31] "[l]itis pendentia is a Latin term, which literally means 'a pending suit' and is variously referred to in some decisions as lis pendens and auter action pendant. As a ground for the dismissal of a civil action, it refers to the situation where two actions are pending between the same parties for the same cause of action, so that one of them becomes unnecessary and vexatious."[32]
	GR No. 184015 2012-02-08	SPS. MARIANO P. MARASIGAN AND JOSEFINA LEAL v. CHEVRON PHILS. MENDOZA, J.
Litis pendentia is a Latin term, which literally means "a pending suit" and is variously referred to in some decisions as lis pendens and auter action pendant. As a ground for the dismissal of a civil action, it refers to the situation where two actions are pending between the same parties for the same cause of action, so that one of them becomes unnecessary and vexatious. It is based on the policy against multiplicity of suits.[6]