FULGADO v.

CA 181 SCRA 81

FACTS: Ruperto Fulgado filed a case against the defendants for the annulment of certain contracts. The
defendants and their counsel failed to appear. They were declared in default and Ruperto was allowed
to present his evidence ex parte. The defendants then filed an appeal with the CA, who ruled in their
favor.

The case was again set for hearing. Unfortunately, the presiding judge went on leave. Ruperto Fulgado
died, and his sole witness, Jose Fulgado migrated to USA. When the hearing resumed, defendants
moved to strike the testimonies of Ruperto and Jose because they were deprived of their right to cross-
examine. Trial court ruled in favor of the defendants. CA affirmed.

ISSUE: WON the testimonies of Ruperto and Jose should be stricken off the record?

RATIO: No. The right to cross-examine is a personal right which may be forfeited by failure of a party to
avail of the ample opportunity given him. In the case at bar, the defendants had enough opportunity to
cross-examine Ruperto before his death, and Jose, before his migration. Despite their knowledge of
Ruperto’s health and Jose’s travel. As a matter of fact, it took them more than one year from the finality
of the judgment of the CA lifting the order of default before they asked the trial court to resume the
hearing of the case.