EMILIO G. MAPUA , plaintiff-appellee, vs . FELIX MENDOZA,
PRUDENCIO NOVOA, and ISABEL PELAYO , defendants-appellants.
Hipolito de Jesus for appellants.
Ramon Sotelo for appellee.
SYLLABUS
1. PLEADING AND PRACTICE; COUNTERCLAIMS. — A joint debt may not be
set up against a separate demand. 2. ID.; JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT. — Judgment by default is properly rendered, when the defendant fails to appear at the time required in the summons, or to le his demurrer or answer to the complaint within the time xed by the Code Procedure and the Rules of Court. 3. ID.; MOTIONS TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENTS. — For a motion to set aside a default judgment to proper, the moving party must show by an a davit of merits that if then default is set aside, he has a just and valid defense to present. Motions to set aside judgments by default are addressed to the sound discretion of the court. 4. ID.; ID.; PENDING MOTIONS. — It is generally irregular to enter judgment by default while a motion remains pending and undisposed of. 5. ID.; ID.; ID.; MOTIONS FOR BILLS OF PARTICULARS. — Application for a bill of particulars must be seasonably made. 6. ID., ID., ID., ID. — Whether the application for a bill of particulars extends the time for the defendant to demur or answer quarry. 7. GAMBLING LOSSES, RECOVERY. — Our Gambling Law permits any person who loses any money or valuable consideration or thing in any gambling house, or at any prohibited game, such as Monte, or his heirs, executors, administrators, or judgment creditors to recover within three years thereafter the money, consideration, or thing, together with an additional sum equal to the value thereof from the persons in charge of the game, or in control of the gambling house. 8. ID.; LIABILITY OF WIFE. — Articles 1406 and 1411 of the Civil Code in relation with the Gambling Law make the wife jointly and severally liable with her husband when action is brought against them to recover losses in a prohibited gambling game. (Manresa, Comentarios al Codigo Civil, vol. 9, p. 645.)
Kevin Daryl O'neal, Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Defendant, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, and Clopay Corporation, Intervenors-Appellants v. Joe Martin Kennamer, Defendant-Cross-Claim-Defendant, W.S. Newell, Inc., Defendant-Cross-Claim Prince Trucking, a Partnership, Defendant-Counterclaim-Plaintiff-Cross-Claim Associates Insurance Company v. Lend Lease Trucks, Inc., Counterclaim-Defendant, 958 F.2d 1044, 11th Cir. (1992)