Opinion ID: 1405642
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Motions for partial summary judgment and in limine regarding the Baguio City Regional Trial Court order

Text: On June 7, 1996, Imelda filed a motion for partial summary judgment on GBC's claim for conversion of the golden buddha, as well as a motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning the golden buddha. Both motions were predicated on the May 30, 1996 order of the Baguio City Regional Trial Court releasing the buddha in the clerk's custody to Jose Roxas. Imelda contended that the trial court's finding that the buddha taken from Roxas was not made of gold was binding on GBC under the principles of res judicata and collateral estoppel. She argued that Cathcart's letter constituted an appearance in the proceedings in the Baguio City Regional Trial Court and that Umali also represented GBC as local counsel. Cathcart denied that Umali was associated with GBC and asserted that he had been accorded no notice of the proceedings in the Baguio City Regional Trial Court prior to writing his letter. On July 16, 1996, the circuit court denied Imelda's motions, ruling that GBC had not been accorded due process in the Baguio City proceedings.