SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 245405. March 25, 2019.]
JOSEPH LEGASPI LOZADA, petitioner, vs.GERALDINE B. LOZADA, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated25 March 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 245405 (Joseph Legaspi Lozada v. Geraldine B. Lozada)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the October 4, 2018 2 and December 27, 2018 3 Orders of the Regional Trial Court of the City of Manila, Branch 29 (RTC) in Civil Case No. 17-138158 for failure of petitioner Joseph Legaspi Lozada (petitioner) to sufficiently show that the RTC committed reversible error in dismissing the case with prejudice on the ground of, inter alia, petitioner and/or his counsel's failure to appear in two (2) consecutive hearings without valid explanation.
As correctly ruled by the RTC, a plaintiff and/or his counsel's unjustified non-appearance on the date/s of the presentation of his evidence in chief is a ground for dismissal of the case with prejudice pursuant to Section 3, 4 Rule 17 of the Rules of Court (Rules). 5 It is settled that "[a] dismissal based on any of the grounds in Section 3, Rule 17 of the Rules has the effect of an adjudication on the merits. Unless otherwise qualified by the court, a dismissal under said rule is considered with prejudice, which bars the refiling of the case," 6 as in this case. aDSIHc
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 3-22.
2.Id. at 23. Signed by Judge Roberto P. Quiroz.
3.Id. at 29-30-A, including dorsal portions.
4. Section 3. Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff. — If, for no justifiable cause, the plaintiff fails to appear on the date of the presentation of his evidence in chief on the complaint, or to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time, or to comply with these Rules or any order of the court, the complaint may be dismissed upon motion of the defendant or upon the court's own motion, without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in the same or in a separate action. This dismissal shall have the effect of an adjudication upon the merits, unless otherwise declared by the court.
5. See rollo, pp. 29-A-30.
6.Martinez v. Buen, G.R. No. 187342, April 5, 2017, 822 SCRA 334, 343-344, citing Armed Forces of the Philippines Retirement and Separation Benefits System v. Republic, 707 Phil. 109, 114-115 (2013).