Golez v. Bertuldo

Summary

The Supreme Court reversed lower court decisions in this property dispute involving neighboring lots. Spouses Golez purchased Lot 1024 in 1976 but mistakenly built their house on Lot 1025, owned by Domingo Bertuldo. When Domingo's heirs filed for unlawful detainer after his death, all lower courts ruled in their favor. However, the Supreme Court held that unlawful detainer was an improper remedy because Domingo never tolerated the construction from the beginning - he immediately objected and protested. Since tolerance must exist from the start of possession for unlawful detainer to be valid, the complaint failed to state a cause of action. The Court emphasized that contradictory allegations in a complaint - claiming both tolerance and immediate objection - cannot support an unlawful detainer case. The proper remedy should have been forcible entry, but that had prescribed after one year from the 1976 entry, leaving accion publiciana as the appropriate remedy.