Title: Action for Eviction and Subsequent Repetitive Claim
J. filed an action against S., alleging trespass and seeking eviction from a parcel of land. S. defended on the ground that the disputed land was jointly owned and that neither he nor N. had committed trespass. The court rendered a final judgment declaring the land to be the exclusive property of J. and ordered S. and his associates to vacate.
Subsequently, N. and S. jointly instituted a new action against J., asserting co-ownership of the same parcel and seeking an injunction restraining J. from interfering with the land. The trial court in the latter case held that the land was jointly owned and granted the injunction.
However, since the issue of ownership had already been finally adjudicated in the prior case, the subsequent action constitutes a repetitive claim barred by the doctrine of res judicata under Section 1359 of the Civil and Commercial Code and the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. Accordingly, the latter judgment is legally incorrect.