dimayuga- laurena vs ca (digest)

2
DIMAYUGA-LAURENA vs CA and JESSE LAURO LAURENA Petition for review on certiorari on CA decision | declaration of nullity of marriage PETITION PARTIALLY GRANTED CA affirmed RTC decision with modification FACTS 19 December 1983 – Darlene and Jesse wed in Intramuros 2 children: Mark (1985), Michael (1987) 19 Oct 1993 – Petitioner filed petition of declaration of nullity of marriage; respondent was psychologically incapacitated since: Invited 15 yr old boy to sleep in same hotel room with them during honeymoon Watched TV while Darlene suffered miscarriage, almost bled to death Prioritized parents’ needs over hers Womanizer Had feminine tendencies Sept 1990 – Jesse abandoned conjugal home and stopped supporting children Conjugal properties: Dayap Makati duplex House and lot in Tanauan, Batangas Jeddah Caltex dealership Lancer, Safari, L300, L200 vehicles Jeddah Trucking Petitioner prayed for 1) dissolution of conjugal partnership 2) custody, and 3) monthly support (P 25,000) RTC: Petition DENIED, conjugal partnership of gains DISSOLVED, custody awarded to children’s parent of choice Darlene’s appeal: since nullity of marriage was denied Jesse’s appeal: parents’ properties declared as part of conjugal partnership of gains CA’s ruling Darlene failed to prove Jesse’s psychological incapacity medically identified and that it was existing at time of marriage – hence marriage is not null Sustained dissolution of partnership of gains – respondent’s abandonment of family sufficient grounds for dissolution Tanuan, Dayap, Jeddah Caltex, and Jeddah Trucking excluded Darlene filed motion for reconsideration

Upload: beatriz-bayudan

Post on 13-Dec-2015

377 views

Category:

Documents


15 download

DESCRIPTION

digest

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Dimayuga- Laurena vs CA (Digest)

DIMAYUGA-LAURENA vs CA and JESSE LAURO LAURENA• Petition for review on certiorari on CA decision | declaration of nullity of marriage

• PETITION PARTIALLY GRANTED• CA affirmed RTC decision with modification

FACTS

• 19 December 1983 – Darlene and Jesse wed in Intramuros

• 2 children: Mark (1985), Michael (1987)

• 19 Oct 1993 – Petitioner filed petition of declaration of nullity of marriage; respondent was psychologically incapacitated since:

• Invited 15 yr old boy to sleep in same hotel room with them during honeymoon

• Watched TV while Darlene suffered miscarriage, almost bled to death

• Prioritized parents’ needs over hers

• Womanizer• Had feminine tendencies

• Sept 1990 – Jesse abandoned conjugal home and stopped supporting children

• Conjugal properties:

• Dayap Makati duplex

• House and lot in Tanauan, Batangas

• Jeddah Caltex dealership

• Lancer, Safari, L300, L200 vehicles

• Jeddah Trucking

• Petitioner prayed for 1) dissolution of conjugal partnership

2) custody, and 3) monthly support (P 25,000)

• RTC: Petition DENIED, conjugal partnership of gains DISSOLVED, custody awarded to children’s parent of choice

• Darlene’s appeal: since nullity of marriage was denied

• Jesse’s appeal: parents’ properties declared as part of conjugal partnership of gains

• CA’s ruling

• Darlene failed to prove Jesse’s psychological incapacity medically identified and that it was existing at time of marriage – hence marriage is not null

• Sustained dissolution of partnership of gains – respondent’s abandonment of family sufficient grounds for dissolution

• Tanuan, Dayap, Jeddah Caltex, and Jeddah Trucking excluded

• Darlene filed motion for reconsideration

ISSUE + RATIO: WON FACTS ARE SUFFICIENT TO PROVE PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY OF RESPONDENT

• Petitioner failed to prove psychological incapacity

• RTC and CA found that Molina case guidelines were not satisfied

WON PROPERTIES EXCLUDED BY CA PART OR CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP OF GAINS

• NO – but Dayap duplex house should be included (DoAS executed in favor of Jesse, no proof it was bought with revenues from Jeddah Caltex)

HELD:

Petition PARTIALLY GRANTED. CA decision/resolution affirmed with modification