Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
DECISION
TINGA , J : p
The instant petition seeks the review of the Decision 1 dated 30 May 2002 and
Resolution 2 dated 28 May 2003 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 66993 entitled
"Pfeger R. Dulay v. Hon. Alicia B. Gonzales-Decano, etc. and Rodrigo S. Dulay."
In a complaint 3 for recovery of his bank deposit with prayer for a writ of attachment
and damages, Rodrigo S. Dulay, a naturalized American citizen, alleged that upon his
petition sometime in October of 1996, his brother Godofredo S. Dulay, Sr. and nephew
Pfeger R. Dulay immigrated to the United States of America. The two stayed with him in his
house at Claremont, Massachusetts. Godofredo, however, decided to return to the
Philippines because he could not endure the weather. Pfeger stayed behind to take care of
Rodrigo. Having nurtured affection, love and trust for his nephew Pfeger, Rodrigo opened a
trust account with the Bank of Boston on 27 January 1997 with a deposit of Two Hundred
Thirty Thousand U.S. Dollars ($230,000.00), naming Pfeger as trustee thereof. Five months
later, Pfeger left Rodrigo's house allegedly to join his girlfriend in California. Rodrigo
learned only later that Pfeger actually went back to the Philippines. Pfeger returned to the
United States in November of 1997, but after a brief stay returned again to the Philippines
where he went on a spending binge. Upon knowing this, Rodrigo veri ed the status of his
account with the Bank of Boston, and to his shock and dismay discovered that Pfeger had
already emptied the account. Rodrigo additionally claimed that Pfeger used the money
from said account to buy several vehicles, loan money to several people, open bank
accounts for his siblings, and buy a house and lot and jewelry for his wife. Whatever was
left of the account was allegedly transferred to Pfeger's father, Godofredo. 4
Denying the accusations, respondent claimed that the money deposited in the name
of Pfeger was his own money and not Rodrigo's. They assailed the admissibility of the
Statement of Account and the supporting A davit attached to the Complaint. For his part,
Pfeger asserted that he spent his own money. 5
Rodrigo led a petition for the issuance of letters rogatory in order to get the
depositions of several witnesses residing abroad. 6 Petitioners, on the other hand, moved
to be allowed to le cross-examination questions to respondent's written interrogatories,
which the trial court granted. 7 In an order dated 1 December 1999, the trial court stated:
These are petitions for letters Rogatory dated November 11, 1999 and
November 22, 1999 respectively praying that this Court order the Clerk of Court to
issue any order requiring the Clerk of Court in Boston Ma., USA to conduct the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
examination of the following parties:
1. Mr. Rodrigo S. Dulay of 38 Claremont St. Malden, Ma., USA, and AIaDcH
SO ORDERED. 8
More importantly, the Court nds that respondent substantially complied with the
requirements for depositions taken in foreign countries.
Footnotes
1. Penned by Associate Justice Bienvenido L. Reyes, JJ., Roberto A. Barrios and Edgardo F.
Sundiam, concurring.
2. Rollo, pp. 26-27.
3. Id. at 30-36. The case was raffled to RTC Branch 48, Urdaneta City, Pangasinan presided
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
by Judge Alicia Gonzales-Decano.
4. Id. at 32-34.
5. Id. at 40-45.
6. Id. at 46.
7. CA Rollo, p. 72.
8. Id. at 47.
9. Id. at 49-51.
10. Id. at 52.
11. Rollo, p. 49-A.
12. Id. at 59.
13. Id. at 60.
14. Id. at 53-57.
15. CA Rollo, pp. 25-26.
16. Id. at 25.
17. Id. at 28.
18. Rollo, p. 24.
19. Id. at 25.
20. Id. at 26-27.
21. Id. at 13.
22. Ibid.
23. Jonathan Landoil International Co., Inc. v. Mangudadatu, G.R. No. 155010, 16 August
2004, 436 SCRA 559, 573, citations omitted.
24. People of Philippines v. Webb, 371 Phil. 491, 512 (1999).
25. Security Bank Corporation v. Court of Appeals, 380 Phil. 299, 309 (2000).
26. Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (2004).
27. RULES OF COURT, Rule 23, Secs. 11 and 14:
Section 11. Persons before whom depositions may be taken in foreign countries. — In
a foreign state or country, depositions may be taken (a) on notice before a secretary of
embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent of the
Republic of the Philippines; (b) before such person or officer as may be appointed by
commission or under letters rogatory; or the person referred to in Section 14 hereof.