Lourdes filed a complaint for a sum of money against Doming before the RTC of Davao City. After Lourdes rested her case, Doming filed a demurrer to evidence without first obtaining leave of court, arguing that Lourdes had failed to prove the existence of the alleged obligation. The RTC granted the demurrer and dismissed the complaint. Lourdes appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which reversed the RTC and found Lourdes's evidence sufficient to sustain her claim for the full amount demanded. Doming then moved before the CA to have the case remanded to the RTC for him to present his evidence, arguing that the reversal of the grant of the demurrer effectively reopened the case for trial on both sides.

Is Doming entitled to present his evidence after the CA reversed the RTC's grant of the demurrer to evidence? (Bar 2026 Syllabus)