DOTMATRIX TRADING vs.

LEGASPI
G.R. No. 155622 October 26, 2009

FACTS:

Dotmatrix Trading, petitioners, are engaged in the business of buying and selling of commodities,
including day-old chicks. Respondent, Rommel B. Legaspi was the petitioners’ supplier of day-old
chicks from September to December 2001. Sometime in 2002, the respondent sent a demand letter
to the petitioners for the payment of delivered day-old chicks. Petitioners replied with a demand for
delivery of an alleged deficiency or return of the over-payment made. Failing to satisfy each other's
demands, both parties went to court.

On June 11, 2002, Dotmatrix Trading filed a complaint against the respondent before RTC-Tarlac for
the return of the over-payment made, plus damages. On June 19, 2002, Legaspi filed before RTC-
Malolos a complaint for the collection of balance and damages against the petitioners.

Upon receipt of the summons and complaint, the respondent filed a motion to dismiss the case
before RTC-Tarlac on the ground of litis pendentia. RTC-Tarlac granted the motion to
dismiss. Petitioners elevated the case to the SC on a pure question of law.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the case before RTC-Tarlac - filed ahead of the case before RTC-Malolos - should be
dismissed on the ground of litis pendentia.

RULING:
SC dismissed the petition. The rule on litis pendentia does not require that the case later in time
should yield to the earlier case; what is required merely is that there be another pending action, not
a prior pending action. Neither is it required that the party be served with summons before lis
pendens can apply; it is the filing of the action, not the receipt of summons, which determines
priority in date.

SC held further that the case before RTC-Malolos is the appropriate case to determine the rights of
the parties. The case in Tarlac is purely preemptive. Another compelling reason is the stage of the
case. Trial on the merits has already been conducted in the case before RTC-Malolos, with the
petitioners given the full opportunity to present evidence on their defense. To dismiss it at this point
would result in needless delay in the resolution of the parties’ dispute and bring them back to
square one.

The elements of litis pendentia (pending suit) are:

The parties in the two actions are the same.
There is a substantial identity in the causes of action and in the reliefs sought.
Any judgment that may be rendered in one case, regardless of which party is successful, would
amount to res judicata in the other.
In ascending order of importance, these are considered in determining which action should prevail:
The date of filing, with preference generally given to the first action filed to be retained.
The action sought to be dismissed was filed merely to preempt the later action or to anticipate its
filing and lay the basis for its dismissal.
The action is the appropriate vehicle for litigating the issues between the parties.