G.R. NO. 129242 January 16, 2001 De Manalo vs CA FACTSTroadio Manalo, a resident of 1996 Maria Clara Street, Sampaloc, Manila died intestate on February 14, 1992. He as sur!i!ed by "is ife, #ilar S. Manalo, and "is ele!en $11% c"ildren, namely& #urita M. 'ayme, (ntonio Manalo, Mila)ros M. Terre, *elen M. +rillano, sabelita Manalo, -osalina M. (cuin, -omeo Manalo, -oberto Manalo, (malia Manalo, +rlando Manalo and melda Manalo, "o are all of le)al a)e.1âwphi1.nêt(t t"e time of "is deat" on February 14, 1992, Troadio Manalo left se!eral real properties located in Manila and in t"e pro!ince of Tar lac includin) a business under t"e name and style Manalos Mac"ine S"op it" offices at /o. 19 Cala!ite Street, 0a 0oma, ueon City and at /+. 43 eneral Tinio Street, (rty Subdi!ision, 5alenuela, Metro Manila. +n /o!ember 26, 1992, "erein respondents, "o are ei)"t $% of t"e sur!i!in) c"ildren of t"e late Troadi o Manalo, namely7 #urita, Mila)ros, *elen -ocalina, -omeo, -oberto, (mal ia, and melda filed a petition 6 it" t"e respondent -e)ional Trial Court of Manila 8 of t"e udicial settleme nt of t"e estate of t"eir late fat"er, Tr oadio Manalo, and for t"e appointment of t"eir brot"er, -omeo Manalo, as administrator t"ereof. : #et ition as oppo sed by # ilar ;e Ma nal o an d fr ien ds !"A& n t"eir petition for improperly laid in S# . #-+C. /o. 92:6<6267 $2% t"e trial court did not ac=uire urisdiction o!er t"eir persons7 $<% t"e s"are of t"e sur!i!in) spouse as included in t"e intestate proceedin)s 7 $4% t"ere as absence of earnest efforts toard compromise amon) members of t"e same family7 and $3% no certification of non: forum s"oppin) as attac"ed to t"e petition. t"e same s"ould be dismissed under -ule 16, Section 1$% of t"e -e!ised -ules of Court "ic" pro!ides t"at a motion to dismiss a complaint may be filed on t"e )round t"at a condition precedent for fillin) t"e claim "as not been complied it", t"at is, t"at t"e petitioners t"erein failed to a!erin t"e petition in S#. #-+C. /o. 92:6<626, t"at earnest efforts toard a compromise "a!e been made in!ol!in) members of t"e same family prior to t"e fillin) of t"e petition pursuant to (rticle 222 14 of t"e Ci!il Code of t"e #"ilippines. #ssue& >+/, t"e failure to a!er in t"e petition t"at earnest efforts toard a compromise "a!e made in!ol!in) members of t"e same family prior to t"e fillin) of t"e petition. Rul$n%/o, t"e case i s not applica ble in a specia l proceedin) ust li?e t"e case at bar. T&e rule(rt. 222. /o suit s"all be filed or maintained beteen members of t"e same family unless it s"ould appear t"at earnest efforts toard a compromise "a!e been made, but t"at t"e same "a!e failed, subect to t"e limitations in (rticle 2@<3$underscoring supplied%. 22 T"e abo!e:=uoted pro!ision of t"e lais applicable only to ordinary ci!il actions. T"is is clear from t"e term suitt"at it refers to an action by one person or persons a)ainst anot"er or ot"er in a court of ustice in "ic" t"e plaintiff pursues t"e remedy "ic" t"e la afford s "im for t"e re dress of an inur y or t"e enforc ement of a ri) "t, "et"er at laor in e=uity. 2< ( ci!i l action is t"us an action filed in a court of ustice, "ereby a party sues anot"er for t"e enforcement of a ri)"t, or t"e pre!ention or redress of a ron). 24
