Laws Applicable: Articles 21 and/or 27 of the Civil Code,Rule 8, section 1 and Rule 16 of Rules of Court
FACTS:
- October 5, 1958: Jose Amaro was assaulted and shot at near the city government building of Silay
- Next Day: Jose Amaro, his father Cornelio Amaro and his witnesses went to the office of the chief of police Ambrosio Sumanguit who harassed and terrorized them in their daily work, ordering them thru his police to appear in his office when he is absent and he is about to order the arrest of the plaintiffs to take their signatures in prepared affidavits exempting the police from any dereliction of duty in their case against the perpetrator of the crime
- A case was filed against Sumanguit on the basis of:
- ART. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.ART. 27. Any person suffering material or moral loss because a public servant or employee refuses or neglects, without just cause, to perform his official duty may file an action for damages and other relief against the latter, without prejudice to any disciplinary administrative action that may be taken.
- CFI: dismissed upon appellee's motion in the court below on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action
ISSUE: W/N the case should not be dismissed for vagueness or because there are other recourse available
HELD: YES. set aside and the case is remanded to the Court of origin for further proceedings
- Under the new Rules of Court, an action cannot be dismissed upon the ground that the complaint is vague, ambiguous, or indefinite (see Rule 8, section 1), because the defendant, in such case, may ask for more particulars (Rule 16) or he may compel the plaintiff to disclose more relevant facts under the different methods of discovery provided by the Rules.
- having another recourse (in connection with the crime of illegal discharge of firearm supposedly committed against one of them) as by filing their complaint directly with the city attorney of Silay or by lodging an administrative charge against appellee herein, does not preclude this action for damages under Article 27 of the Civil Code and hence does not justify its dismissal