Veloira vs Veloira

Facts:
Ricarte and Margarita, got married on October 2, 1952. From that time, except for brief
separations, they had been living together until December 22, 1956, when they were estranged
from each other.
Then followed a series of incidents that happened on December 22, 1956, that led Ricarte to file
for legal separation on the ground that Margarita made an attempt against his life. The lower
court (Court of Juvenile & Domestic Relations), granted him a decree of legal separation.
Margarita did not agree and made a counterclaim (which is the present case).
Events are as follows:
1. Ricarte and Margarita were quarreling about his Christmas bonus. In frustration, Ricarte
took out his pistol and told Margarita he will kill her. Margarita cried and Ricarte went
outside to their hammock.
2. Margarita took out a bolo and told Ricarte: I will wreck our car so that he will not use it
anymore.
3. Ricarte saw Margarita holding the bolo and he ran away to the police.
4. Margarita, using the bolo, wrecked the car.
5. Patrolman Gustuir witnessed Ricarte coming up to him and reported that his wife was
destroying his car. Patrolman Gustuir also witnessed Margarita wrecking the car with
the bolo.
6. According to Patrolman Gusuir, while they were questioning Margarita, Ricarte drove
away the car and failed to return anymore.

Issue: Did the lower court erred in granting the petition for legal separation, under the facts and
circumstances of the case, in direct and shocking contravention of the spirit and purpose of the law on
legal separation?

Ruling: YES. But assuming that the respondent try to hit the petitioners neck with a bolo, can such act
alone be considered as an attempt against life? An attempt against one's life carries with it the intent to
kill, as in the case of an attempted or frustrated homicide.

In the case at bar it appears that after trying to hit the petitioner and the latter had run away, the
supposed assailant (Margarita) made no effort to do him any further harm. Such behavior belies (to
show something to be false/wrong) the intent to kill.

The present petition is, therefore, devoid of cause of action and, consequently, we are of the opinion
that it should be, as it is hereby, dismissed, and the decision appealed from reversed. The counterclaim
(Margaritas petition) is likewise dismissed, the respondent having failed to prove it sufficiently.