Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(2009 Revision) 1
THEODORE O. TE2
Intended for Exclusive Use of the University of the Philippines College of Law
Bar Examination Candidates for 2009 in the Professional Enhancement Program-Bar Review 2009
Any other use, without permission of the author, is prohibited and all legal rights are reserved.
These forms were first made in 1997 and distributed n 1998 for use in the UP-LSG Bar Ops for that year; its
was formerly titled Pleadings, Petitions, Motions and Other Legal and Judicial Forms. It was last revised in
this form 2007; the contents are also published by CDAsia as Philippine Legal and Judicial Forms and
copyright is owned by the Author. All rights are reserved..
2
Assistant Professor, University of the Philippines;
Vice President for Legal Affairs, University of the
Philippines; Former Director, Office of Legal Aid; Ll.B., U.P. (1990); Grateful acknowledgement is given to
Atty. Feliz Marie M. Guerrero, J.D. U.P. (2008) for invaluable assistance in re-formatting, proofreading and
updating of legal references.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
On Writing, Legally
I.
COMMON FORMS
A. Caption and Title
B. Prayer
C. Jurat
D. Verification
E. Certification against Forum Shopping
F. Combined Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
G. Combined Verification, Certification against Forum Shopping, and
Statement of Material Dates
H. Request for and Notice of Hearing
I. Proof of Personal Service
J. Proof of service by registered mail (with Explanation for failure to serve
personally)
K. Place, date, signature, address, Roll number, IBP receipt number, PTR
number
L. Acknowledgement
M. Notice of Appeal
II.
ii
v
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
IV.
V.
VI.
27
28
29
30
31
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
48
49
49
50
51
52
54
55
55
56
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
R.
S.
VII.
Holographic Will
Notarial Will
Attestation Clause for a Notarial Will
Acknowledgement of a Notarial Will
Donation Inter Vivos
Acknowledgment of Nominee Status with Assignment of Shares
Secretarys Certificate
Board Resolutions
1. Authority to Act
2. Increase in number of directors and necessary amendment to the
Articles of Incorporation
Deed of Assignment
Deed of Sale of Registered Land (unilateral)
Deed of Sale of Unregistered Land (unilateral)
Deed of Sale with Pacto de Retro (bilateral)
Deed of Repurchase of land sold under Pacto de Retro
Deed of Sale with Mortgage
Dacion en Pago (Deed of Assignment of Real Estate in payment of debt)
Chattel Mortgage
iv
57
57
58
58
59
60
61
61
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
70
70
70
70
70
71
71
ON WRITING, LEGALLY
Therefore, its name was called Babel,
because there the Lord confused the
language of all the earth. Genesis, 11:9,
ESV
If brevity is the soul of wit, what now is to become of lawyers (and law students) who
would nonchalantly write a 100-page document and dare call it a Brief?
The traditional notion of legal writing is that it is a competition to put together as
many four to five-syllable words in a one-paragraph sentence. The language of the law
mystifies and with this comes the power of the lawyer for the more obscure and obtuse 3 the
language, the greater the need for a lawyer.
History has given us many language handicaps and obstacles to clarity and precision.
Throughout four or five years of law school, the law student, who eventually becomes a
lawyer, is trained to think in archaic words and phraseslegalesewhich appear to have great
legal significance but are actually too imprecise to help anyone understand what is going on.
And to add to the Babelish situation, there are hundreds of words in a dead languageLatin
that have little relevance to the contemporary world.
There is a sea change, however, going on in legal writing. More and more, pleaders
are asked to be clear and concise, precise not pedantic. Why waste five words when only
three will do? 4 But change, as always, is difficult and painful. Yet, it is an essential response
to todays evolving legal profession. Indeed, when the most common means now of
communicating is faster than sound SMS, with its own subculture and lingo, there must be a
re-examination of the archaic and pedantic manner by which legal writing presents itself.
What this short introduction to the accompanying handbook of Pleadings, Petitions,
Motions and Other Legal and Judicial Forms seeks to do is to put forth the need to write
clearly and concisely, precisely but not pedantically. What this Forms book seeks to do is to
assist the fledgling 5 and seasoned legal pleader, drafter and advocate by presenting in the
form they are required to appear, with words that are clear and concise, precise not pedantic.
When a judges attention span is short and his reading backlog is long, the need to
write concisely, clearly, precisely and not pedantically becomes absolutely urgent.
Writing concisely and not pedantically, however, does not mean that the legal writer
ought to cut corners when it comes to substance as well as form; the only thing that that
guarantees is a baleful stare and a rude dismissal from the judge. Not only must the writer
The use of the word is deliberate and intended to be ironic--to demonstrate the point.
My favorite, and many of my students will attest to this, is the absolutely archaic Comes Now, the Plaintiff,
by the undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable Court, respectfully states that as part of every pleading. Why
waste 15 words, when 6 will do, thus: Plaintiff, by counsel, respectfully states that. The latter loses none of
the legal gravitas but loses every bit of the archaic pretense that mystifies the law and perpetuates the notion that
laywers know what they are doing each and every time.
5
It was originally intended as a bar examination guide and as a teaching tool for evidence and procedure
classes.
4
know the arguments and the bases for his arguments, but she must also realize that these
arguments need to be presented in a manner that is technically sufficient.
It is hoped that the forms presented here, with checklists 6 of legal requirements and
short annotations, will provide the impetus for demystifying legal writing and legal drafting.
These forms come from actual forms used in the authors practice, some from worthy
opponents and still some from traditional form books, with updates to fit the current state of
the Rules.
While this handbook was produced, primarily, with bar examinees and the law intern
or law student in mind, it is hoped that it might prove helpful as well when September ends 7
and life, as a lawyer, begins in earnest.
Theodore O. Te
3 rd Floor, Quezon Hall (Southwing),
University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City
Acknowledgment is given to Atty. Alex M. Enriquez, (Ll.B., UP, 1990) for the original template of the
Checklists, which have been updated to suit current practice.
7
The reference is to the song by Green Day, an American punk band, entitled Wake Me Up When September
Ends, which has absolutely nothing to do with the bar or taking the bar (as it refers to a death in the family)
except the month referred to in the title and the yearning expressed to see the month end. It has, at some point
in time, aptly become an unofficial anthem of sorts for some bar examinees, Much more apt perhaps than My
Way which starts with, And now the end is near.
vi
I.
COMMON FORMS
A. Caption and Title
______________________,
Defendant.
x------------------x
B. Prayer
PRAYER
WHEREFORE it is respectfully prayed, after notice and hearing, that the defendant be ordered to
pay the plaintiff the amount of One Million Pesos (Php.1,000,000) for actual and compensatory damages,
Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php.50,000) for moral damages, Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php.50,000) for exemplary
damages, and Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php.50,000) for attorneys fees.
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
C. Jurat
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me in the City of _______________ on this day of
_________________, affiant exhibiting before me his Government Issued ID no. _______________
issued on __________________ at _____________________.
(Sgd.) N. O. TARIO
Notary Public
Until __________________
PTR No. _______________
Issued at ______________
On ___________________
Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of 2007.
D. Verification
VERIFICATION
Republic of the Philippines
City of _______________
)
) s.s.
C.K. Hilfiger, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, deposes and states that:
1. He is the plaintiff in the pleading/document entitled (pleading/document being verified)
2. He has caused its preparation
3. He has read it and the allegations therein are true and correct of his own knowledge or
based on authentic records.
)
) s.s.
C.K. Hilfiger, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law deposes and states that:
1. He is the plaintiff in the case entitled (title of the case);
2. He certifies that he has not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same
issues before any other court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency;
3. To the best of his knowledge, there is no such pending action or claim;
4. If he should learn that a similar action or claim has been filed or is pending he shall report
such fact within five (5) days from the discovery to this Honorable Court.
(Sgd.) C.K. HILFIGER
PLUS: Jurat
F. Combined Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
VERIFICATION & CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
I, C.K. Hilfiger, of legal age, do hereby state that: I am the Chief Executive Office of Alis Di-yan
Company and in such capacity, caused this Complaint to be prepared; I have read its contents and affirm
that they are true and correct to the best of my own personal knowledge; I hereby certify that there is no
other case commenced or pending before any court involving the same parties and the same issue and
that, should I learn of such a case, I shall notify the court within five (5) days from my notice.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument on _____________.
PLUS: Jurat
G. Combined Verification,
Material Dates
Certification against
Forum Shopping,
and Statement of
PLUS: Jurat
J.
Proof of service
personally)
by
registered mail
failure
to serve
)
) s.s.
AFFIDAVIT
I, HARPER LEE, a messenger of Atty. Atticus Finch, with office address at __________________,
after being duly sworn, deposes and states:
That on ______________________, I served a copy of the following pleadings/papers by
register ed mail in accordance with Section 10, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court:
Nature of Pleading/Paper
________________________
________________________
in Case No. _________________ entitled
in a sealed envelope, plainly addressed
postage fully paid, as evidenced by
instructions to the post master to return
TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, I have signed this Affidavit on 13 April 2007, in the City of
Manila, Philippines.
(Sgd.) HARPER LEE
Affiant
PLUS: Jurat
K. Place, date, signature, address, Roll number, IBP receipt number, PTR number,
MCLE Compliance or Exemption Number, Contact Details
City of Manila, 13 April 2007.
Atty. Mitch McDeere
Counsel for the Defendant
2 The Firm, Laguna Street,
Quezon City, Metro Manila
Roll No.
IBP OR No., date and place of issue
PTR OR No., date and place of issue
Comment [LR12]: As per A.M. NO. 07-6-5SC, counsels are now required to indicate
in their pleadings or other legal documents
their contact details aside from address,
i.e., telephone, fax, mobile or email
address.
Comment [FG13]: As per SC En Banc
Resolution on Bar Matter No. 1132 dated
Nov. 12, 2002, all pleadings must indicate
the ff:
1. Roll of Attorneys number of counsel
2. Current Professional Tax Receipt
number (PTR No.)
3. IBP O fficial Receipt or Life Member
number
Comment [LR14]: As per BM 1922, MCLE
compliance or exemption number for the
specific compliance period must be stated;
failure to do so may mean dismissal of the
case or expunction of the pleading. (Note:
this came as a result of Justice Nachuras
letter to the SC noting the diminished
interest in the MCLE)
L. Acknowledgment
Republic of the Philippines
City of Manila
)
) s.s.
BEFORE ME, this 13th day of April, 2007 in the City of Manila, Philippines, personally appeared
ATTICUS FINCH, with [Valid Identification Document] (Drivers License No. N25-07-007777) issued by the
[official agency] (Land Transportation Office) on 10 January 2007, known to me to be the same person
who executed the foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me that the same is his free act and
deed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and affixed my Notarial seal on the day, year and
place written.
(Sgd.) N. O. TARIO
Notary Public
Until __________________
PTR No. _______________
Issued at ______________
On ___________________
Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of 2007
NOTE: If the instrument consists of 2 or more pages, include the following after the 1st paragraph:
This instrument, consisting of ___ pages, including the page on which this acknowledgment is
written, has been signed on the left margin of each and every page thereof by ___________ and his
witnesses (if any), and sealed with my Notarial seal.
NOTE: If the instrument conveys 2 or more parcels of land, include the following after the 1st paragraph:
This instrument relates to the sale (or mortgage) of ___ parcels of land, and consists of ___
pages including the page on which this acknowledgment is written, each and every page of which, on the
left margin, having been signed by ______________ and his witnesses (if any), and sealed with my
Notarial seal.
M. Notice of Appeal
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Defendant, ABC, by counsel, respectfully appeals to this Honorable Court the Decision of the
lower court dated 13 April 2007, a copy of which he received on 26 April 2007.
Quezon City, 2 May 2007.
(Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Defendant
2 The Firm
Laguna Street, Quezon City
II.
- versus -
YOKO NGA,
Defendant.
x ----------------------------------- x
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
[2] 1. Plaintiff is a foreign corporation organized and existing under the laws of France with
business address at 111 Ocean Drive, Tuna Compound, Quezon City; Defendant is a Filipino, of legal age,
single and currently resident of 112 Ocean Drive, Tuna Compound, Quezon City, where he may be served
with summons and other pertinent processes.
[3] 2. Plaintiff owns that property located at 112 Ocean Drive, Tuna Compound, Quezon City
which it leased to defendant under the terms and conditions stated in the Contract of Lease dated 1
January 2005, which contract expires on 31 December 2006. A copy of the contract is attached as ANNEX
A.
3. Upon expiration of the contract, plaintiff informed defendant of its intention not to renew the
lease as it would use the property for its business expansion; plaintiff then asked defendant to vacate the
premises. A copy of plaintiffs letter to defendant is attached as ANNEX B.
[4] 4. Despite demand duly made and received, defendant has refused to vacate the premises
and continues to occupy the property without plaintiffs consent. Resort to the Barangay conciliation
system proved useless as defendant refused to appear before the Lupong Tagapamayapa. A Certification
to File Action is attached as ANNEX C .
5.
Defendants act of dispossession has caused plaintiff to suffer material injury because
plaintiffs business expansion plans could not be implemented despite the arrival of machineries
specifically leased for this purpose at the rental rate of US$500 per month. Defendants continued
occupation of the premises has also forced plaintiff to sue and to incur legal expenses amounting to Fifty
Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00).
[5] WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays for judgment in its favor by ordering defendant to
vacate the property and peacefully turn over possession to plaintiff and for defendant to pay plaintiff the
amount of US$3,500 representing rentals on the machineries for seven (7) months and Fifty Thousand
Pesos (P50,000.00) for Attorneys fees.
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
[6] Quezon City; 13 April 2007.
[7] (Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]
PLUS:
1. [8] Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
2. Jurat
- versus -
MANGGA GANTSO,
Defendant.
x -------------------------- x
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
[2] 1.
Plaintiff is a Filipino, of legal age, and resident of 6750 Forbes Park, Makati City;
defendant is also a Filipino, of legal age and resident of 6752, Forbes Park, Makati City, where he may be
served with summons and other processes.
[3] 2.
Sometime in January 2005 and over a period of six (6) months, defendant borrowed
certain amounts from plaintiff. Defendant promised to pay these amounts on an installment basis
monthly. These amounts now total Nine Hundred Thousand Pesos (P900,000.00).
[4] 3. Despite repeated demands, both oral and written, defendant failed or has refused to pay
any amount to plaintiff as no installment payment has even been made. A copy each of plaintiffs two (2)
demand letters is attached as ANNEX A and B.
4.
Resort to the Barangay Conciliation process proved fruitless as defendant failed to appear,
despite notice on him to appear. Thus, a Certification to File Action, a copy of which is attached as
ANNEX C, was issued by the Barangay Chairman.
5. Defendants obligation is due and demandable and plaintiff is entitled to the payment of the
entire amount of Nine Hundred Thousand Pesos (P900,000.00) plus legal interest.
6.
By reason of defendants unreasonable failure or refusal to pay his due and demandable
obligation, plaintiff was forced to engage the services of counsel to vindicate his rights thereby
committing himself to pay legal expenses amounting to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00).
[5] WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays for judgment in his favor through a Decision
directing defendant to pay him NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P900,000.00), with legal interest, as
ACTUAL DAMAGES and FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00) as Attorneys Fees.
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
[6] Quezon City for Makati; 13 April 2007.
[7] (Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]
PLUS: [8] Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
[2] 1. Plaintiff is the general manager of Hurts Rent-A-Car with offices at Makati City; defendant
is a Tongan, temporarily residing at Bayview Hotel, Roxas Boulevard, Manila.
[3] 2. Hurts Rent-A-Car is the registered owner of a Honda CRV with license plate number XLV675, which defendant, on 3 March 2005, rented from plaintiff for a period of one (1) week.
[4] 3.
On 15 March 2005, plaintiff demanded from defendant the return of the car but
defendant failed and refused to do so.
4. The car has not been taken for a tax assessment or a fine pursuant to law nor has it been
seized on execution or attachment. Its present value is approximately Nine Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P900,000.00).
5. Plaintiff is ready, willing and able to give bond in defendants name in double the value of the
property for the return of the property to defendant should that be adjudged or for the payment of such
sum that defendant may recover from plaintiff in this action.
[5] WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that the writ of replevin issue directing the Sheriff or
any other authorized officer to take possession of the car and dispose of it in accordance with the Rules
of Court and, after hearing, judgment be rendered declaring plaintiff to be lawfully entitled to the
possession of the car and sentencing defendant to pay its value.
[6] Quezon City for Makati City; 13 April 2007.
[7] (Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for the Plaintiff
[Address]
PLUS: [8] Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
[2] 1. Plaintiff and Defendant are both Filipino citizens and of legal age; plaintiff resides at 1-A,
Cruz Street, Pasig City while defendant resides at 2 Frisco Street, Pasig City, where he may be served
with summons.
[3] 2. On 1 January 2003, defendant leased to plaintiff the premises at 1-A Cruz Street, Pasig
City for a monthly rental of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) to be paid within the first five (5) days of
each month.
month.
3.
There is no fixed period for the lease agreement except that rentals are to be paid by the
[4] 4. Plaintiff has been paying the rentals as they fall due each month, without fail. However,
on 4 April 2006, defendant gave notice to plaintiff that he is terminating the lease agreement by the end
of August 2006.
5. Considering that the period of lease has not been fixed, this Honorable Court may fix a longer
period of time as the lessee has been occupying the place for a period of three (3) years. A period of two
(2) years is reasonable considering that the lessee has no place to transfer to immediately and that he
has introduced substantial improvements to the premises amounting to Fifty Thousand Pesos
(P50,000.00).
[5] WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that this Honorable Court fix a period of years for the
lease between plaintiff and defendant.
[6] Quezon City for Pasig City; 13 April 2007.
[7] (Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]
PLUS: [8] Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
Defendant.
x ----------------------------------- x
ANSWER
(With COUNTERCLAIM)
DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully states that:
Admissions/Denials
[2] 1. He admits the contents of paragraph 1 only insofar as his personal circumstances but
specifically denies the contents insofar as plaintiffs personal circumstances for the reason stated in the
Affirmative Defenses below.
2. He admits the contents of paragraph 2 only where it states that a Contract of Lease was
entered into but specifically denies that the Contract reflects the true intent of the parties as explained in
the Affirmative Defenses below.
3. He admits the contents of paragraph 3 only as to the fact that demand to vacate was made
but specifically denies its contents as to the truth of the reasons for the letter for lack of knowledge
sufficient to form a reasonable belief as to its truth or falseness..
4.
He specifically denies the contents of paragraphs 4 to 6 for the reasons stated in the
Affirmative Defenses below.
Affirmative Defenses
[4] 5. Defendant reiterates, repleads and incorporates by reference all the foregoing insofar as
they are material and additionally submit that the Complaint should be dismissed because:
5.1. Plaintiff has no capacity to sue as it is a foreign corporation doing business
in the Philippines without a license.
5.2. The Complaint fails to state a cause of action as the Contract of Lease
(ANNEX A) was, before its expiration, superceded by a Deed of Absolute Sale whereby
plaintiff sold to defendant the parcel of land in question, a copy of which is attached as
ANNEX 1.
Counterclaim
[5] 6. Defendant reiterates, repleads and incorporates by reference all the foregoing insofar as
they are material and additionally submit that he is entitled to relief arising from the filing of this
malicious and baseless suit, as follows:
6.1.
Moral Damages amounting to One Million Pesos (PHP1,000,000/00)
because his name and reputation were besmirched by this malicious and baseless suit.
6.2. Attorneys Fees amounting to One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00)
because he was compelled to secure services of counsel to vindicate his legal rights.
[6] WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully prays that judgment be rendered in his favor by
dismissing the Complaint and granting defendants counterclaim by awarding defendant: (a) One Million
Pesos as Moral Damages, and (b) Fifty Thousand as Attorneys Fees.
Other just and equitable reliefs are prayed for.
10
the defendant in the case filed by Alis Dithe preparation of this Answer with
true and correct to the best of my own
a n d d u e e x e cu t io n a s we ll a s t h e
b in d in g e ffect o f t h e a ct iona b le d o cu m e n t s p le a d e d b y p la in t iiff ; I hereby certify that there is no
other case commenced or pending before any court involving the same parties and the same issue and
that, should I learn of such a case, I shall notify the court within five (5) days from my notice.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument on 13 April 2007.
(Sgd.) YOKO NGA
PLUS:
1. Jurat (IF any document is denied)
2. [11] Proof of Service (personal service or service by register ed mail)
11
co-defendant MANGGA GANTSO be made liable to indemnify defendant in the same amount
under the Crossclaim.
12
C. Pre-trial Brief
Plaintiff,
Defendant.
x ------------------------------------- x
PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully submits her Pre-Trial Brief, as follows:
I. WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO AN AMICABLE SETTLEMENT
AND POSSIBLE TERMS OF ANY SUCH SETTLEMENT
1.1. Subject to a concrete proposal that is fair and reasonable and a reciprocal manifestation of
openness from plaintiff, defendant is open to the possibility of amicably settling this dispute.
[1 & 2] 1.2.
Pursuant to Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, defendant
respectfully submits that the desired terms of any amicable settlement would involve, first, a clarification
of the actual extent of any obligation due and owing to plaintiff inasmuch as there is nothing to indicate
defendants obligations to plaintiff and, second, a schedule of payments.
II. BRIEF STATEMENT OF CLAIMS AND DEFENSES
2.1.
Plaintiff seeks principally to recover the amount of Twenty Two Million Eight Hundred
Eighteen Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Eight Pesos and Thirty Centavos (PHP22,818,948.30) with
interest at twelve percent (12%) arising allegedly from unpaid orders delivered to defendant variously in
1989.
2.2. Defendant resists plaintiffs claims based on a failure to state a cause of action because of :
2.2.1.
Plaintiffs lack of personality to sue and, therefore, not being the real
party in interest under Rule 3, section 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedur e;
2.2.2.
Furniture.
the entity
Regency
2.3.
Defendant also interposed a compulsory counterclaim for Two Million Pesos
(PHP2,000,000.00) for moral damages and Two Million Pesos (PHP2,000,000.00) for exemplary damages
and One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PHP100,000.00) as attorneys fees.
III. FACTS AND OTHER MATTERS ADMITTED BY THE PARTIES
[3] 3.1.
Defendant admits only those facts stated in her Answer, i.e., her personal
circumstances, receipt of the demand letter dated January 5, 1997 and her reply to the demand letter.
3.2. Subject to a concrete proposal for stipulation of additional facts from plaintiff during pretrial or even thereafter, defendant admits no other facts stated in the Complaint.
IV. ISSUES TO BE TRIED
proof:
[4] 4.1.
Defendant submits that the following issues put forward by plaintiff are subject to
13
4.2.2.
Defendants entitlement to the
Counterclaim as a result of plaintiffs bad faith;
claims
made
in
her
Compulsory
V. EVIDENCE
[6] 5.1. Defendant intends to present the following witnesses:
5.1.1. Defendant herself, who will testify on the true circumstances leading to
the filing of this suit against her;
5.1.2. An employee of Topless Enterprises with personal knowledge as to the
true circumstances behind the alleged obligations due and owing in favor of plaintiff.
[5] 5.2. Defendant reserves the right to present any and all documentary evidence which shall
become relevant to rebut plaintiffs claims in the course of trial as well as any other witnesses whose
testimony will become relevant to belie plaintiffs witnesses, if necessary.
VI. RESORT TO DISCOVERY
[7] 6.1. Considering the relatively simple issues presented, defendant does not intend to avail of
discovery at this time.
6.2.
Subject, however, to a concrete and reasonable request for discovery from plaintiff,
defendant reserves the right to resort to discovery before trial.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 13 April 2007.
(Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Defendant
[Address]
Copy furnished:
Atty. MA BOLA
Counsel for Plaintiff
14
D. Motions
1. Motion to dismiss (with request for and notice of hearing)
Republic of the Philippines
National Capital Judicial Region
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
Branch 39, Quezon City
LAKI ASSET COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully moves to dismiss the Complaint on the ground that the
Complaint fails to state a cause of action as [1] THE OBLIGATION SOUGHT TO BE ENFORCED BY
PLAINTIFF IS NOT YET DUE AND DEMANDABLE, as shown by the following:
[2] 1.
Allegedly, plaintiff has failed to reach the quotas agreed upon under the Marketing
Agreement dated 1 January 2006; defendant now seeks to collect the sum of TWO HUNDRED
THOUSAND PESOS (P200,000.00), representing the balance of the proceeds due plaintiff under the said
Marketing Agreement.
2. The
specified therein;
as there is yet
attained. For this
contract is for one (1) year and defendant is given that same period to reach the quota
the period of one (1) year has not expired. Consequently, plaintiffs claim is premature
no breach of the Marketing Agreement until the period expires and the quota is not
reason, plaintiffs Complaint states no cause of action and must be dismissed.
[3] WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully prays that the Complaint be DISMISSED for failure to
state a cause of action.
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
Quezon City; 13 April 2007.
(Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Defendant
[Address]
[4] REQUEST FOR & NOTICE OF HEARING
15
2. Motion for leave of court to file pleading (with explanation for service by
registered mail)
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
LAKI UTANG,
Petitioner,
[1] 1. Petitioner received a copy of respondents Comment to his petition on 3 January 2006.
The Comment contains several allegations of fact and misinterpretations of the record that may mislead
the court and need to be corrected. For this reason, petitioner intends to file a Reply.
[2] 2. Under existing rules, a Reply can no longer be filed as a matter of course. Consequently,
petitioner seeks leave of this Court to file the said Reply, a copy of which, pursuant to the 1997 Rules on
Civil Procedure, is attached to this motion.
[3] WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully prays that he be granted leave of court to file a Reply
and for the Court to admit the attached Reply.
Quezon City for Manila; 5 January 2007.
(Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for the Petitioner
[Address]
PLUS:
1. [4 ] Request for and Notice of Hearing
2. [5] Explanation for service by register ed mail
16
favor.
[3] WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays a judgment on the pleadings be rendered in his
Quezon City; 13 April 2007.
(Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for the Plaintiff
[Address]
PLUS:
1. [4] Request for and Notice of Hearing
2. [5] Proof of Service
17
18
[2] 3.
Without impugning the importance of these proceedings, plaintiff respectfully submits
that his attendance in the Makati case becomes indispensable; otherwise, the accused in said case would
be deprived of the opportunity to confront and cross-examine a vital witness against her.
4. This motion is prompted only by the foregoing reason and not for delay.
[3] WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that the trial scheduled on 5 May 2007 be
POSTPONED to another date convenient to this Honorable Court.
Quezon City; 13 April 2007.
(Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for the Plaintiff
[Address]
PLUS:
1. [4] Request for and Notice of Hearing
2. [5] Proof of Service
19
20
21
[3] WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully prays that the Order of Default against her be LIFTED
and that this Honorable Court resolve her Motion to Dismiss.
Quezon City; 8 April 2007.
(Sgd.) OBI WAN KENOBI
Counsel for Defendant
[Address]
PLUS:
1. [4] Request for and Notice of Hearing
2. [5] Proof of Service
22
[3] 3. (State briefly the facts and circumstances under which the respondent/s exercising
judicial functions acted without, or in excess of, jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting
to lack or excess of jurisdiction. )
4. (State entitlement to Injunction and/or TRO, i.e., [a] petitioner has a clear, legal right, [b]
which is threatened by an act or omission of respondents, [c] and that, unless restrained, will cause
grave and irreparable injury to petitioner. Allege also that petitioner is ready to post a bond in an amount
to be fixed by the Court conditioned upon the payment to respondents of any damages suffered arising
from the writ should petitioner be found not to be entitled to the writ. )
5. There is no appeal from such decision or any plain or adequate speedy remedy in the ordinary
course of law, except this petition.
6.
ANNEX A.
A certified true copy (or duplicate original copy) of the Decision under review is attached as
[4] WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that a writ of certiorari be issued ANNULLING the (act,
decision or finding) for being in grave abuse of discretion; in the interim, that a preliminary injunction
and/or temporary restraining order issue to ENJOIN any further proceedings by respondents.
Quezon City; [1] 7 July 2007.
(Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for the Petitioner
[Address]
PLUS: [5] Combined Verification, Certification against Forum Shopping, and Statement of Material Dates
* Rule 65, section 6, par. 2 expressly makes Rule 56, section 2 applicable to petitions for certiorari,
mandamus and prohibition. Rule 56, section 2 provides that Rules 46, 48, 49, 51, 52 and 56 apply. Rule
46, section 3 provides that the petition must be accompanied not only by a certified true copy of
the judgment or order questioned but also by such material portions of the record as are
referred to therein, and other documents, relevant or pertinent thereto.
23
b. Prohibition
[3] 3. (State briefly the facts and circumstances under which the respondent/s whether
exercising judicial or ministerial functions acted without, or in excess of, jurisdiction or with grave abuse
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. )
4. (State entitlement to Injunction and/or TRO, i.e., [a] petitioner has a clear, legal right, [b]
which is threatened by an act or omission of respondents, [c] and that, unless restrained, will cause
grave and irreparable injury to petitioner. Allege also that petitioner is ready to post a bond in an
amount to be fixed by the Court conditioned upon the payment to respondents of any damages suffered
arising from the writ should petitioner be found not to be entitled to the writ. )
5. There is no appeal from such decision or any plain or adequate speedy remedy in the ordinary
course of law, except this petition.
6.
ANNEX A.
A certified true copy (or duplicate original copy) of the Decision under review is attached as
24
c.
Mandamus
(Caption and title)
PETITION
25
[1] 1. Plaintiff and defendants are all of legal age; plaintiff resides at ________________ while
defendants reside at _______________ and _______________, respectively, where they may be served
with pertinent notices.
[2] 2. On 1 June 2007, plaintiff found a Gold Rolex Oyster watch, without knowing who its true
owner is. The watch is now in plaintiffs possession. On or about 5 June 1999, defendants made similar
representations to plaintiff as to ownership of the watch.
3.
Plaintiff, who claims no interest in the watch, cannot determine the conflicting claims of
defendants and thus seeks to compel defendants to interplead and litigate their several claims between
themselv es.
[3] WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that this Honorable Court issue an order directing
defendants to interplead with one another to determine their respective rights and claims and to allow
plaintiff to recover his expenses for safekeeping and the costs of this suit, as first lien upon the subject
matter of this action.
[4] Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
[5 ] (Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
26
[1] 1. He is the special administr ator of the estate of the deceased DAMI LUPA.
[2] 2. The deceased, during his lifetime, executed a Deed of Sale of real estate in favor of the
respondent dated _____________, and particular ly described, as follows:
(Describe property)
covered by TCT No. 12345 in the Register of Deeds of Makati. The same is annotated on the title as the
only encumbrance thereon.
3. The sale is fictitious and the Deed of Sale is forged, as shown by a judgment in Civil Case No.
2468, a copy of which is attached.
4. The existence of the alleged Deed of Sale is prejudicial and injurious to the title of the lawful
heirs of the deceased upon the said property. Equity demands that the said Deed of Sale be surrendered
and cancelled, as it is a cloud upon the title of the deceased and his lawful heirs.
[3] WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully prays that this Honorable Court render judgment in the
Estates favor by ordering the Deed of Sale surrendered and cancelled and the cloud on Title No. 12345
removed.
[4] Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
[5] (Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Petitioner
[Address]
PLUS: [6] Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
27
c.
INA API,
Plaintiff,
- versus -
28
d. Quo Warranto
(Caption and title)
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
[1] 1. (State the capacity and address of both plaintiff and defendant. )
[2] 2. (State fully and clearly the facts and circumstances showing that defendant is unlawfully
occupying a public office and that plaintiff is entitled to hold the same office. )
3. (State that plaintiff has demanded that defendant vacate said office and deliver it to plaintiff
but that defendant has unlawfully refused to do so.)
[3] WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that a writ of quo warranto issue ousting and
excluding defendant from occupying the office of ____________ and declare that plaintiff is entitled to
the said office and that he be placed forthwith in possession thereof.
[4] Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
[5] (Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for the Plaintiff
[Address]
PLUS: [6] Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
29
III.
)
) s.s.
COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT
[1] I, MA SELAN, of legal age, Filipino, with assistance of counsel, and [2] resident of 4 Privet
Drive, Triple X Village, Makati, do hereby state under oath that:
1.
I am a member of the Triple X Village Homeowners Association (Association) and was
formerly a Director and Corporate Secretary of the Association.
[3] 2. I accuse and hereby charge MR. MA INGAY, residing at 5 Privet Drive, Triple X Village,
Makati, of violating Article 358 of the Revised Penal Code (Slander and Oral Defamation), committed
against me when he publicly, maliciously and deliberately uttered defamatory remarks against me during
the Board Meeting of the Association on 27 January 2007. This is attested to by the following exchange
that transpired between Mr. Ingay and the other members of the Board in attendance:
(Quote Exchange)
Attached as ANNEX A is a copy of the official transcript of the meeting.
3. Prior resort to the Barangay conciliation system proved fruitless as Mr. Ingay did not retract
his remarks. Consequently, a Certification to File Action was issued by the Barangay Chairperson, a
copy of which is attached as ANNEX B.
4. There is no other person named Ma Selan residing at Triple X Village nor is there any other
person named Ma Selan who has acted as Board Member of the Association. Consequently, Mr. Ingays
public and defamatory utterance was clearly a reference to me and to no other.
5. Mr. Ma Ingays remarks, calling me a swindler twice over, uttered in a public meeting are
clearly insulting and defamatory as they malign me and attribute to me a criminal act, nature and
predisposition. There is, moreover, no doubt that Mr. Ingays use of the word swindled was deliberate
as his explanation and clarification a few utterances thereafter would show. Mr. Ingays remarks are also
very serious as they cast aspersions on my reputation, character and very person before my peers and
fellow homeowners.
6. Mr. Ingays remarks have injured my name, reputation and character before my neighbors
and peers. While my name, reputation and character are incapable of pecuniary estimation as these are
the result of a lifetimes effort to build a name, reputation and character that my children and their
children can be proud to bear, Mr. Ingay cannot be allowed to simply go scot-free without bearing the
consequences of his acts. For this reason, I am also holding Mr. Ma Ingay liable civilly for
defaming me in the amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) in nominal damages, Five
Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) in moral damages and Five Hundred Thousand
Pesos (P500,000.00) in exemplary damages.
TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, I have signed this Complaint-Affidavit on 13 April 2007.
[4] (Sgd.) MA SELAN
Complainant-Affiant
[5] SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 13th day of April 2007.
(Sgd.) Investigating Prosecutor
[6] CERTIFICATION
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY EXAMINED THE AFFIANT AND AM SATISFIED
THAT HE VOLUNTARILY EXECUTED AND UNDERSTOOD HIS AFFIDAVIT.
(Sgd.) Investigating Prosecutor
30
2. Counter-Affidavit
Republic of the Philippines
City of Makati
) s.s.
)
COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
Re: I.S. No. 1613
[1] I, MA LABO, of legal age, with assistance of counsel, do hereby state under oath that:
1. I am the Chief of Staff of the Mayor of Quezon City, and have been occupying said post since
his election to the post in 1998. In said capacity, I am in charge of coordinating the day-to-day affairs
and activities of his Office.
[2] 2.
I recently learned that I have been made a respondent in I.S. No. 1613, a charge for
estafa, filed by a certain MA GULANG on 19 January 2007 before the Office of the City Prosecutor for
Quezon City.
3. The charge is based on a supposedly unpaid account for the purchase of seven (7) Nextel
phone units by a Mr. MANGGA GANTSO of the Quezon City Rescue and Environmental Distress Unit,
which made the Mayor their Honorary Chairman with no direct functions; he has been supporting their
activities financially with voluntary contributions.
[3] 4. There is no truth to the allegations in MA GULANGs complaint. There is no factual nor
legal basis to charge me with estafa. The Complaint must be dismissed. To rebut and contradict MA
GULANGs malicious lies, I set forth the true circumstances leading to the transaction below:
4.1. Sometime last year, Ms. Gulang called the office of the Mayor, looking for
him; I informed her that he was not around. I took a message from her saying that she
was a friend of the Mayor and that she was selling Nextel units and if we wanted to buy
units from her. I informed her that both the Mayor and I had our units already; she then
told me if the Mayor could refer her to prospective clients. When the Mayor arrived, I
relayed the message to him.
4.2. Quite coincidentally, Mr. Gantso had called the Mayor asking if he could
assist in securing Nextel units. The Mayor asked me to call Ms. Gulang. Mr. Gantso and
Ms. Gulang were able to meet, as a result.
4.3. On that day, Ms. Gulang brought the units to the Mayors Office; she met
with Mr. Gantso inside the Mayors office. They transacted business inside the Mayors
Office and only passed by my office on their way out.
4.4. Some time after that, Ms. Gulang phoned me and told me that Mr. Gantso
had not paid her the amount of P11,000.00 for the units. Somewhat embarrassed by
this, I called Mr. Gantso and told him to pay Ms. Gulang; he assured me that he would
pay her but that he just needed to collect money from the rest of the group.
4.5. After persistent calls from Ms. Gulang telling me that Mr. Gantso had not
yet paid, I gave her the telephone number of Gantso so that she could just call him
directly. But even then, I would still get calls from Ms. Gulang; and when she started to
get angry over the telephone, I set up an appointment for Mr. Gantso to meet with her
at the Office.
4.6. Thereafter, I would still receive phone calls telling me that Mr. Gantso had
yet to pay; I would follow up with Mr. Gantso but he simply gave me this promise that he
would pay.
5. It is utterly inexplicable that Ms. Gulang would hold me liable for estafa when all that I did
was to refer Ms. Gulang to Mr. Gantso; to a certain extent, I even exerted my best efforts to see that Ms.
Gulang was paid due simply to my great embarrassment at the prospect of being accused of referring a
person who does not know how to pay for an obligation.
6. For this reason, it is certainly incomprehensible that I should stand accused of estafa by Ms.
Gulang. I performed no act of deceit or fraud against her in ordering the units. I performed
NO ACT that even remotely resembles ANY of the acts punished under Article 315. If at all,
any cause of action is PURELY CIVIL in nature and that liability does not pertain to my personal account
in the absence of a showing that I benefited from the Nextel units (which Ms. Gulang does not even
allege and cannot prove); any civil liability should pertain to the Office of the Mayor, not to me.
31
7. Considering the foregoing, I respectfully submit that there is no prima facie basis to conclude
that the crime of Estafa or that any crime at all has been committed. The Complaint against me should,
thus, be dismissed.
TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, I have signed this Statement on 3 February 2007.
[4] (Sgd.) MA LABO
Affiant
PLUS:
1. [5] Verification
2. [6] Certification
32
- versus PI KUTIN,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------- x
INFORMATION
The Undersigned accuses PI KUTIN of the crime of Bigamy, committed as follows:
That on or about 3 July 2006, in the City of Quezon and within the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Court, the said accused, being then legally married to BIL MOKO, and
without such marriage having been legally dissolved and thus valid and existing, did
wilfully, unlawfully and felicitously contract a second marriage with ASA WA in the City of
Quezon.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
CERTIFICATE OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation in this case was conducted by me in accordance
with law; that I examined the Complainant and her witnesses; that there is reasonable ground to believe
that the offense charged had been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof; that the
accused was informed of the Complaint and of the evidence submitted against him and was given the
opportunity to submit controverting evidence; and that the filing of this Information is with the prior
authority and approval of the City Prosecutor.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 9th day of August 2006 in Quezon City.
AL CAPONE
City Prosecutor
33
b. Theft
(Caption)
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No. 00567
For: Theft
Accused.
x --------------------------------------------- x
INFORMATION
The Undersigned accuses KLEPTO MANIAC of the crime of Theft, committed as follows:
That on or about 3 July 2006, in the City of Quezon and within
the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, then 11 years
old and without any known address, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously,
with intent to gain, without force upon things or violence upon persons
and without the knowledge and consent of MA ALAHAS, the owner, took
a gold necklace studded with diamonds valued at One Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) to the prejudice of said owner.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
CERTIFICATION AS TO CONDUCT OF INQUEST
I hereby certify that the accused was lawfully arrested without a warrant and that, upon being
informed of his rights, refused to waive the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code and, for
this reason, an Inquest was conducted; that based on the complaint and the evidence presented before
me without any countervailing evidence submitted by the accused, despite opportunity to do so, there is
reasonable ground to believe that the accused has committed the crime of theft and should, thus, be
held for said crime; that this Information was with the prior authority of the City Prosecutor.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 9th of August 2006 in Quezon City.
AL CAPONE
City Prosecutor
34
c.
Attempted Rape
(Caption)
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No. 00567
For: Attempted Rape
Accused.
x --------------------------------------------- x
INFORMATION
The undersigned accuses MAEL SIA of attempted rape committed as follows:
That on or about 6 June 2005, in Quezon City, the accused did then and there
wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously enter the house of SEK SEE, a married woman, and
finding that her husband was away, with lewd designs and by means of force and
intimidation, commenced directly by overt acts to commit the crime of attempted rape
upon her person, to wit: while SEK SEE was cooking lunch, the accused seized her from
behind, threw her to the floor, raised her skirt, pulled down her underwear and
attempted to penetrate her with his sexual organ and would have succeeded in doing so
had not her loud protests and vigorous resistance brought her neighbors to her
assistance, causing the accused to flee from the premises without completing all the acts
of execution.
CONTRARY TO LAW with the aggravating circumstance of dwelling.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
PLUS: Certification of Preliminary Investigation or Inquest
35
d. Frustrated Murder
(Caption)
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No. 00567
For: Frustrated Murder
Accused.
x --------------------------------------------- x
INFORMATION
The undersigned accuses MAMA MATAY of frustrated murder committed as follows:
That on or about 21 August 2006, in Quezon City, the accused did then and
there take a loaded .44 Caliber Magnum pistol, directly aim the same firearm at the
person of VIC TIMA, an invalid septuagenarian, and, at point blank range, with intent to
kill, discharge the firearm twice against the person of said Vic Tima, inflicting on said Vic
Tima two (2) wounds on his chest and stomach, which wounds would have been fatal
had not timely medical assistance been rendered to the said Vic Tima.
CONTRARY TO LAW with the aggravating
Premeditation, use of firearm and disregard of age.
(Sgd.) ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
PLUS: Certification of Preliminary Investigation or Inquest
36
circumstances
of
Evident
C. Motions
1. Motion to Quash Information
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x
MOTION TO QUASH
[2] THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves to quash the Information for the crime of
theft on the following:
[3] GROUNDS
1.
2.
37
VIG CHAN,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------------- x
MOTION TO QUASH SEARCH WARRANT
The ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves for the quashal of Search Warrant No. 1122 issued
by this Honorable Court on and dated 12 July 2006 based on the following considerations:
[2] 1. Rule 126, Sec. 10 or the Revised Rules of Court provides expressly that a search warrant
shall be valid for ten (10) days from its date and that thereafter, it shall be void.
2. Search Warrant No. 1122 is dated 12 July 2006. It was served on the accused on 23 July
2006, the 11th day from its date; this is certified to by the Sworn Inventory and Return executed by Major
Alang Alam, the leader of the searching team (a copy of which is already part of the records). A search
was made on the same day, 23 July 2006; pursuant to said search, certain objects were seized and
delivered to the court. Under the law, the Search Warrant is void and must, thus, be quashed.
[3] WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that Search Warrant No. 1122 be QUASHED and all
objects seized under its purported authority be declared INADMISSIBLE under the exclusionary rule in
Article III, Section 3(2) in relation to section 2 of the 1987 Constitution.
[4] Quezon City; 25 July 2006.
[5] (Sgd.) MA TAPANG
Counsel for Accused
[Address]
PLUS:
1. [6] Request for and Notice of Hearing
2. [7] Proof of Service
38
VIG CHAN,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------------- x
MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE UNLAWFULLY SEIZED
The ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves for the suppression of objects seized on 23 July
2006, pursuant to Search Warrant No. 1122 issued by this Honorable Court dated 12 July 2006, based on
the following considerations:
[2] 1. Search Warrant No. 1122 was served on the 11th day and is, thus, void.
2. The motor vehicle seized does not fall within the property that may lawfully be seized.
Discussion
1. Rule 126, Sec. 10 of the Revised Rules of Court provides expressly that a search warrant shall
be valid for ten (10) days from its date and that thereafter, it shall be void.
2.
Search Warrant No. 1122 is dated 12 July 2006. It was served on the accused on 23 July
2006, the 11th day from its date; this is certified to by the Sworn Inventory and Return executed by Major
Alang Alam, the leader of the searching team (a copy of which is already part of the records). A search
was made on the same day, 23 July 2006; pursuant to said search, certain objects were seized and
delivered to the court. Under the law, the Search Warrant is void.
3. No valid seizure may be made under a void warrant. For this reason, the following objects
must be suppressed:
[list items]
[2] The motor vehicle seized does
not fall within the property that
may lawfully be seized.
4. On the occasion of the search, the searching party also seized accuseds green Jaguar XJE
with license plate, No. 1", allegedly for being subject of the offense. Thereafter, it was impounded and
kept at the PNP Motor Pool.
5. The motor vehicle cannot be subject of the offense as accused is charged with libel. There is
no relation between the motor vehicle and libel.
6. Moreover, the motor vehicle is not mala prohibita that would justify a seizure thereof; neither
could there be a seizure of evidence in plain view.
[3] WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that all objects seized under the void Search Warrant
No. 1122 be declared INADMISSIBLE under the exclusionary rule in Article III, section 3(2) in relation to
Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution. Furthermore, it is prayed that the Green Jaguar XJE with license plate
No. 1" be immediately returned to the accused.
[4] Quezon City; 25 July 2006.
[5] (Sgd.) MA TAPANG
Counsel for Accused
[Address]
PLUS:
1. [6] Request for and Notice of Hearing
2. [7] Proof of Service
39
- versus -
NAKA PIIT,
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x
MOTION FOR BAIL
[2] THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves to be allowed bail on the ground that the [3]
prosecutions evidence of his guilt is not strong. In support, he respectfully submits the following:
1. The Information alleges that he raped the private complainant on 25 December 2005 at his
residence in Quezon City. The prosecutions own evidence, however, belies this allegation as: (a) the
medical certificate (attached as ANNEX A to the Information) states that private complainant is in a virgin
state with no physical and outward signs of trauma; (b) the medical certificate issued by the NBI doctor
(attached as ANNEX B to the Information) after a physical examination of the accused, two (2) days after
the alleged rape, shows that he is suffering from erectile dysfunction and has been so afflicted for close
to five (5) years now and (c) the sworn statements of the private complainant conflict with and contradict
each other such that her credibility must be placed in doubt.
2.
For these reasons, there is no basis to conclude that the accused raped the private
complainant as there is less than circumstantial evidence of this fact. He is, thus, entitled to bail as a
matter of right.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the accused be granted: (1) a bail hearing, during
which the prosecution should be directed to present its evidence to show the strength of its evidence of
the accuseds guilt, and (2) thereafter, grant the accused reasonable bail.
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
(Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for the Accused
[Address]
PLUS: Request for and Notice of Hearing
40
[1] (Caption)
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
- versus -
RECY DIVIST,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------------- x
APPLICATION FOR PROBATION
THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully applies for probation pursuant to the provisions of
Presidential Decree No. 968, as amended.
In support of this application, the accused respectfully submits the following:
1.
Accused-applicant is of legal age and
Corporation located at Timog Avenue, Quezon City.
offense charged herein; consequently, this Honorable
accused-applicant to an indeterminate penalty ranging
correccional.
[2] 2. Accused-applicant humbly submits that she possesses all the qualifications and none of
the disqualifications enumerated under section 2 of Presidential Decree No. 968, specifically:
order;
2.1.
She has not been convicted of any crime against national security or public
2.2.
She has not been previously convicted by final judgment of an offense
punishable by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month and one (1) day and/or a
fine of not less than Two Hundred Pesos (P200.00);
2.3. She has not previously applied for nor had been previously placed under
probation under Presidential Decree No. 968.
2.4. She has not started to serve her sentence and, to date, has not filed any
Notice of Appeal from the Order of conviction.
3 Finally, granting this application will not in any way depreciate the seriousness of the offense
charged nor cause any undue risk that during the period of probation, accused-applicant will commit
another crime. Moreover, accused-applicant does not need any correctional treatment requiring
commitment to an institution.
[3] WHEREFORE, accused-applicant respectfully prays that her application for probation be
GRANTED and that she be placed under probation under such terms and conditions necessary to attain
and ensure the objectives of the law and which, under the circumstances, are fair, just and reasonable in
the sound discretion of this Honorable Court.
Quezon City for Pasig City; 12 March 2007.
(Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Accused
[Address]
PLUS:
1. [4] Verification
2. [5] Request for and Notice of Hearing
41
IV.
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x
FORMAL OFFER OF EVIDENCE
THE PROSECUTION, by the undersigned public and private prosecutors, respectfully offer their
documentary exhibits in support of their case-in-chief:
1. Exhibit A, the sworn statement of Alang Kaso, the private complainant, and Exhibit A-1, his
signatureto prove that on the date and time stated in the affidavit, the accused issued a post-dated
check in the amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) which, on presentment for payment, was
dishonored for lack of insufficient funds; to prove authorship and the authenticity of the sworn
statement; and as part of the testimony of the private complainant.
2. Exhibit B, the post-dated check dated 30 June 2004, issued by the accused in the amount of
One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00); Exhibit B-1, the dorsal side of the check with notation DAIF; Exhibit
B-2, the signature of accused on face of the checkto prove the issuance of the check, the amount
stated, the reason for dishonor and the identity of the issuer. The marked copies of Exhibits A and B are
already part of the record.
WHEREFORE, the prosecution respectfully prays that the foregoing Exhibits be ADMITTED as
proof of the facts therein stated and in support of its case-in-chief and for all other relevant purposes.
ATTICUS FINCH
Private Prosecutor
Copy furnished:
MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Accused
42
2. Comment/Opposition to Offer
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x
COMMENT ON THE PROSECUTIONS
FORMAL OFFER OF EVIDENCE
THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully oppose the Prosecutions Offer of Evidence for the
following reasons:
1. Exhibit A, the sworn statement of Alang Kaso, the private complainant, and Exhibit A-1, his
signature are INADMISSIBLE because the private complainant was never presented to authenticate the
document or subjected to cross-examination, thus, the document is hearsay and inadmissible.
2. Exhibit B, the post-dated check dated 30 June 2004, issued by the accused in the amount of
One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00); Exhibit B-1, the dorsal side of the check with notation DAIF; Exhibit
B-2, the signature of accused on face of the check are INADMISSIBLE for violation of the Best Evidence
Rule as the original check was never presented; and no basis for the presentation of secondary evidence
laid.
ACCORDINGLY, the ACCUSED respectfully
INADMISSIBLE and must, thus, be EXCLUDED.
submits
43
that
the
Prosecutions
Exhibits
are
Comment [FG100]: NO TE: The purpose of
the offer is never objected to; rather it is
the admissibility of the document that is
objected to. The purpose of offer goes to
weight of the document (unless of course,
the objection is relevance, then purpose
may properly be objected to as relevance
also determines admissibility). Any
objections to purpose should be made in
the Memorandum and an appropriate
reservation to do so may be stated in the
Comment.
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------- x
DEMURRER TO THE PROSECUTIONS EVIDENCE
THE ACCUSED, by counsel, with leave of court previously obtained, respectfully submits this
Demurrer to the Prosecutions Evidence on the ground that the prosecution has failed to adduce sufficient
evidence of his guilt to overcome the presumption of innocence and shift the burden of proof:
1. Under the Constitution, the accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. The effect
of this presumption is that it entitles the accused to not say anything in his defense and places the
burden directly on the prosecution to prove everything relative to his guilt. Thus, the prosecution must
rely on the strength of its evidence and not wait for the accused to offer any defense. It is only in the
event that the prosecution, after resting its case, has adduced sufficient evidence of guilt that the burden
of proof shifts to the accused.
2.
The prosecution has failed to adduce sufficient evidence of guilt such as would shift the
burden of proof.
2.1. The accused is charged with violation of PD 1866; the gravamen of the
offense is unauthorized possession of a firearm. Concretely, this means that the
prosecution must prove that the accused had no legal authority to possess any firearm.
2.2. The prosecution has failed to show that the accused had no license to carry
a firearm. The proof of the negative element is indispensable to proof of a violation of PD
1866. Without proof of this negative element, the crime is not proven.
3. Absent proof of the negative element, i.e., absence of a license, the offense is not proven.
The accused is innocent; he must, thus, be acquitted.
WHEREFORE, the accused respectfully prays that the Information against him be DISMISSED and
that he be ACQUITTED of the crime charged.
Quezon City; 13 April 2007.
DARTH SIDIOUS
Counsel for the Accused
[Address]
PLUS: Request for and Notice of Hearing
44
2. Civil cases
(Caption)
ANAKIN SKYWALKER,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 000909
45
Copy furnished:
46
D. Appearance as Counsel
Please enter the appearance of the undersigned as counsel for defendant Padme Amidala, with
her express conformity as indicated below, in this case. Henceforth kindly address all pertinent notices to
the undersigned at the address given below.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 13 April 2007.
(Sgd.) OBI WAN KENOBI
No. 1, Imzadi Place
Tatooine, Pasig City
WITH MY CONFORMITY:
(Sgd.) PADME AMIDALA
Copy furnished:
DARTH SIDIOUS
47
Please make of record the WITHDRAWAL of the undersigned as counsel for plaintiff ANAKIN
SKYWALKER, with his express conformity as indicated below, in this case. Henceforth kindly address all
pertinent notices to plaintiff at his address given in the Complaint.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
(Sgd.) MACE WINDU
1 Imperial Palace, Cloud City, Pasig City
WITH MY CONFORMITY:
(Sgd.) ANAKIN SKYWALKER
2. Withdr awal as Counsel WITHOUT confor mity of client
(Caption)
ANAKIN SKYWALKER,
Plaintiff,
Please make of record the WITHDRAWAL of the undersigned as counsel for plaintiff ANAKIN
SKYWALKER d u e t o irre co ncilab le p rofession al d ifferences wit h p la in tiff, fo r wh ich re a son t h e
e x p ress co n form it y o f p lain tiff ca n n ot b e o bt ained . Henceforth kindly address all pertinent notices
to plaintiff at his address given in the Complaint.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
(Sgd.) MACE WINDU
1 Imperial Palace, Cloud City, Pasig City
48
F. Substitution of Counsel
(Caption)
ANAKIN SKYWALKER,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 1357
For: Legal Separation
THE UNDERSIGNED respectfully enters his appearance as counsel for defendant Padme Amidala
in substitution of former counsel Darth Maul, as shown by her express conformity below. Henceforth,
kindly address all pertinent notices to the undersigned at the address given below.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
OBI WAN KENOBI
Counsel for Defendant
2 Corruscant Place
Tatooine Road, Pasig City
WITH MY CONFORMITY:
(Sgd.) PADME AMIDALA
G. Notice of Appeal
TALO NAN,
Plaintiff,
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully appeals to the Court of Appeals the Decision of this
Honorable Court dated 6 July 2006, a copy of which he received on 16 July 2006, for being contrary to
law and the evidence presented.
Quezon City for Manila; 17 July 2006.
(Sgd.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]
Copy furnished:
MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Defendant
49
V.
SP No. 111334
PADME AMIDALA,
Petitioner.
ANAKIN SKYWALKER,
Respondent.
x ------------------------------------------ x
PETITION
PETITIONER, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Petitioner is the mother of the minors Luke and Leia Skywalker, who were born out of the
valid marriage between petitioner and respondent Anakin Skywalker.
2.
The marriage failed and petitioner has been living separately from respondent since 2004.
Sometime in February 2007, respondent, unknown to petitioner, abducted the minor children and has
kept them incommunicado and out of petitioner s reach.
3. Being below seven (7) years of age, custody of the minors is naturally presumed to belong to
petitioner, as their mother. Consequently, respondents refusal to allow petitioner to regain custody over
the minors is unlawful and unjustified.
WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully prays that a writ of habeas corpus issue directing
respondent to make a return showing his legal authority to detain the minor children, subject of this
petition, and thereafter, present the minor children personally before the Court on a date and time it
chooses.
Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
OBI WAN KENOBI
Counsel for Petitioner
[Address]
PLUS: Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
50
SP No. 111334
1. Petitioner s are husband and wife, both of legal age, and residents of __________.
2. They have no legitimate children of their own and desire to jointly adopt a minor named
ANAKIN SKYWALKER, 10 years old, the legitimate child of _________________.
3.
The parents of the minor are not insane, intemperate and are in full possession of civil
capacity; they have not abandoned the minor child. With full knowledge of petitioners intention, they
have expressly given their written consent to the adoption, as shown by their statement, a copy of which
is attached as ANNEX A.
4.
Petitioners are qualified to adopt the minor and are financially capable of supporting the
minor; they are also morally qualified to bring up and educate the said minor.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that judgment be rendered in petitioners favor adjudging
the minor child ANAKIN SKYWALKER freed from all legal obligations of obedience and maintenance with
respect to his/her natural parents and that he/she be declared to all legal intents and purposes, the child
of herein petitioners and that his/her surname be changed to that of petitioner s.
Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
(Sgd.) MASTER YODA
[Address]
PLUS: Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
51
Petitioner and respondent were married on [date] and out of this marriage, they have [state
children, respective ages]. A copy of the Marriage Contract executed by petitioner and
is attached as ANNEX A; a copy each of the birth certificates of the minor children is
ANNEX B, C and D, respectively.
4.
Petitioner and respondent are currently separated in fact and have been so since May 2001.
The reason for the continuing separation in fact is the breakdown of the marriage due to both petitioners
and respondents mutual psychological incapacity to fulfill and discharge their respective marital
obligations to each other, which existed at the time of the marriage in 1998 but manifested itself well into
the marriage
5.
The mutual psychological incapacity of the parties to remain married to each other appears
to be incurable; prior to this resort, the parties had attempted formal and informal counseling sessions all
of which proved unproductive as respondent proved resistant and, at times, even hostile to these efforts.
6. In compliance with jurisdictional requirements, petitioner submitted herself to a psychological
and clinical assessment by a trained professional, Clinical Psychologist [state name]. Despite several
attempts, respondent refuses to agree to any sober and productive discussion with petitioner and is
always highly emotional and angry, it was, thus, impracticable to secure a psychological report and
profile of respondent; should this become material, petitioner reserves the right to request respondent to
submit to a psychological examination for purposes of confirming the mutual psychological incapacity to
remain married to each other.
7.
Petitioners psychological incapacity is described in clinical terms as being consistent with a
V61.1 Partner Relational Problem and is said to have Masochistic Personality Disorder or 301.9
Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified; on the other hand, the assessment given by the
psychologist of respondents psychological make-up is that he has a 301.20 Schizoid Personality Disorder
with narcissistic features which is described as grave, incurable and has antecedents.
The
psychological make-up of petitioner and respondent is explained in greater detail in the Clinical
Assessment Report (Report) dated 28 December 2006, a copy of which is attached as ANNEX E.
8.
Their minor children are in petitioners custody and are being supported by her financially
and emotionally.
9. Petitioner submits that, despite the parties mutual psychological incapacity to remain married
to each other, the interests of the children are best served by having them remain in her custody, with
visitation rights extended to respondent. All of the children are minors and, under the law, children under
seven (7) years of age shall not be separated from the mother, save for exceptional circumstances which
do not exist in this case.
10. Petitioner cannot, however, provide for all the financial needs of the children as she is only
earning a limited amount of money from her work whereas respondent is gainfully employed and earns
more than enough for his own personal needs. Petitioner earns only (state amount) from her work as
shown by her payslip attached as ANNEX F whereas respondent earns (state amount) from his work as
shown by his payslip attached as ANNEX G. The common property of petitioner and respondent is
insufficient for the support of the children. Respondent must, thus, be directed to give support to his
children in the amount of (state amount).
WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully prays that PROVISIONAL ORDERS for child custody and child
support be issued giving to petitioner custody pendente lite over their minor children and directing
respondent to give monthly support in the amount of (state amount), subject to any adjustments that
may be made based on changing earning capacity as well as needs.
52
Petitioner also prays that, after trial, judgment be rendered in her favor by declaring petitioner to
be psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential obligations of her marriage to respondent,
thus -[1] Declaring the marriage between petitioner and respondent a nullity and, by this
token, ordering the dissolution of the conjugal partnership of gains; and
[2] Awarding permanent custody of the children
acknowledgement of respondents visitation rights;
to
petitioner,
with
express
53
PALING KERA,
Petitioner,
x ------------------------------------ x
PETITION
PETITIONER, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Petitioner is a Filipino citizen and the widow of the deceased.
2. On 16 August 2006, PABLING SIA died, having previously executed a holographic will in his
own handwriting and in a language known to him. A copy of the will is attached as ANNEX A. The
handwriting may be attested to as his by his secretary of long standing, TOM CRUZ.
2.
The deceased left a house and lot located at No. 555, Tuna Road, Marinara Subdivision,
Quezon City and cash amounting to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000); he had no debts.
3. The deceaseds only heirs are herein petitioner and their son, PABLING SIA JR., both of whom
are residing at No. 555, Tuna Road, Marinara Subdivision, Quezon City.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that after due notice and publication this Honorable Court
fix the date for the probate of the holographic will and that letters of administration be issued in favor of
the herein petitioner and thereafter adjudicate the properties of the deceased in accordance with the said
holographic will.
Quezon City; 7 July 2007.
(Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for the Petitioner
[Address]
PLUS: Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
54
VI.
55
C. Contract of Lease
CONTRACT OF LEASE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
This Agreement made and entered into at Makati this 7th day of July 2007 by and between DAMI
BAHAY, of legal age, married to ASA WA, (LESSOR) and resident of Makati City, and ALANG BAHAY, of
legal age, single and resident of Quezon City (LESSEE), WITNESSETH that:
1.
In consideration of a monthly rental of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS (P5,000.00) and the
covenants made below, the LESSOR hereby LEASES to the LESSEE an apartment located at 199 San
Antonio Village, Makati City covered by Tax Declaration No. 001 (Makati City Assessors Office) for a
period of TWELVE (12) MONTHS from signing of this contract.
2. The LESSEE covenants, as follows:
2.1. To pay the rentals on or before the fifth day of each month, without need
of demand at the residence of LESSOR;
2.2.
To keep the premises in good and habitable condition, making the
necessary repairs and painting inside and outside the house;
2.3.
Not to make major alterations and improvements without the written
consent of the LESSOR and in the event of such unauthorized major alterations and
improvements, surrendering ownership over such improvements and alterations to the
LESSOR upon expiration of this lease;
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this contract on the date and the place first
mentioned.
DAMI BAHAY
Lessor
ANG BAHAY
Lessee
With my consent:
ASA WA
Acknowledgment
BEFORE ME, a Notary Public for Makati City, personally appeared on the 7th of July 2007, the
following persons, with their respective CTC details indicated below:
DAMI BAHAY
ALANG BAHAY
known to me to be the same persons who executed the foregoing instrument, denominated as a Contract
of Lease consisting of __ pages, signed on each and every page by the parties and their instrumental
witnesses, having acknowledged the same before me as their own free and voluntary act and deed.
TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, witness now my hand and seal on the date and place
mentioned above.
Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of 2007.
N.O. TARIO
Until December 31, 2007
PTR No. 0000111/1/05/99, Makati City
56
D. Holographic Will
II.
III.
I designate
Testament.
_______________ as
the
sole
executor
of
this
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand this 7th day of July 2007 in San Juan, Metro Manila.
(Sgd.) PABLING SIA, SR.
57
ATTESTATION CLAUSE
WE, the undersigned witnesses, whose residences are stated opposite our respective names, do
hereby certify that: the testator _________________ has published unto us the foregoing will consisting
of ___ pages numbered correlatively in letters on the upper part of each page, as his/her last will and
testament and has signed the same and every page thereof, on the left margin, in our joint presence and
we, in turn, at his/her request have witnessed and signed the same and every page thereof, on the left
margin, in the presence of the testator and in the presence of each other.
SAKSI 1
SAKSI 2
SAKSI 3
Residence
Residence
Residence
(official
(official
(official
all known to me to be the same persons who signed the foregoing Will, the first as testator and the last
three as instrumental witnesses, and they respectively acknowledged to me that they signed the same as
their own free act and deed.
This Will consists of ___ pages, including the page in which this acknowledgment is written, and
has been signed on the left margin of each and every page thereof by the testator and his witnesses and
has been sealed with my Notarial seal.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand the day, year and place written.
(Sgd.) N. O. TARIO
Notary Public
Until __________________
PTR No. _______________
Issued at ______________
On ___________________
Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of 2007.
58
59
I.
I, GEORDI LA FORGE, (Nominee), of legal age, and with office address at __________, hereby
acknowledge my status as nominee for WILLIAM RIKER (the Principal) for the purpose of holding title
to ___ shares of stock in the Enterprise Holdings Inc. (the Corporation). As nominee, I hereby
unequivocally confirm that the Principal is the exclusive and absolute owner of the subject shares.
Accordingly, the relationship between the principal and the nominee with respect to the subject shares is
governed by the following terms and conditions:
1. All dividends, whether cash, stock or property, rights and other privileges, accruing
on the subject share shall be for the account and benefit of the principal; accordingly,
the nominee shall deliver the same to the principal and whoever the latter may
designate.
2.
Directors fees and other amounts received by way of compensation for services
rendered by the nominee shall be for the account and benefit of the nominee.
3. The principal shall save the nominee free and harmless from any liability, whether for
unpaid subscriptions, taxes or otherwise, that may arise as a result of the nominees
holding title to the subject shares for and on behalf of the principal.
4.
The nominee hereby assigns, transfers, and conveys the subject shares to the
principal free from all liens and encumbrances and hereby undertakes to execute the
necessary instruments to transfer title over the subject shares to the principal or to
whoever the latter may designate.
5.
This acknowledgment of nominee status shall bind the nominees heirs, executors,
administrator s and other successor s-in-inter est.
Done this 7th day of July 2007 at Quezon City.
GEORDI LA FORGE
Nominee
WITH MY CONFORMITY:
WILLIAM RIKER
Principal
WITNESSES:
(Sgd.) UZI 1
(Sgd.) UZI 2
PLUS: Acknowledgment
60
J.
Secretary s Certificate
SECRETARYS CERTIFICATE
I, DEANNA TROI, of legal age, with office address at __________________, on the basis of the
corporate records, do hereby certify that under oath that:
1. I am the Corporate Secretary of ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS INC. (corporation), a corporation
duly organized and existing under Philippine laws, with the same office address given above.
2. At a meeting of the Board of Directors of the corporation held on ___________, at which
meeting a quorum was present and obtained throughout, the following resolution(s) was (were)
unanimously approved and adopted:
61
L. Deed of Assignment
DEED OF ASSIGNMENT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
I, DAMI SHARES, of legal age, Filipino and resident of ________________, for and in
consideration of the sum of ____________________ Pesos (P_____), receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged do hereby assign, cede, transfer and convey unto DAMI LUPA, likewise of legal age, and
resident of ______________, all his/her rights, title, ownership and interest over its subscription to One
Hundred Thousand (100,000) shares of the capital stock of _________ Corporation, including advances
due from said corporation. It is, however, understood that the assignee shall assume any and all unpaid
subscription on the said shares.
The assignor hereby irrevocably constitute, name and appoint the assignee to be his/her true and
lawful attorney-in-fact to make representations with the corporate secretary and to cause the annotation
of this assignment in the books of the corporation.
Manila.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the assignor has signed this deed on 7th day of July, 2007 at the City of
DAMI SHARES
Assignor
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
(Sgd.) MIRON 1
(Sgd.) MIRON 2
PLUS: Acknowledgment
62
)
) s.s.
DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE
[Note: if vendor is married, marital consent must be secured; thus, the Deed must also indicate this. If
vendor is married, then add the following:]
With my consent:
ASA WA
Vendors Wife
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
(Sgd.) MIRON 1
(Sgd.) MIRON 2
PLUS: Acknowledgment
63
)
) s.s.
DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE
[Note: if vendor is married, marital consent must be secured; thus, the Deed must also indicate this. If
vendor is married, then add the following:]
With my consent:
ASA WA
Vendors Wife
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
(Sgd.) MIRON 1
(Sgd.) MIRON 2
PLUS: Acknowledgment
64
)
) s.s.
DEED OF SALE WITH PACTO DE RETRO
This Deed of Sale with Pacto de Retro made and executed by and between:
MA YA MAN, Filipino, of legal age, married to ASA WA, with residence at
___________________ (VENDOR),
- and MA GU LANG, Filipino, of legal age, married to BA TAPA, with residence
at ____________ (VENDEE);
WITNESSETH: That
The VENDOR is the absolute owner of a certain parcel of land with all the buildings and
improvements thereon, situated in the City of Makati, and more particular ly described, as follows:
(Copy technical description in TCT/OCT)
his title thereto shown by Transfer (or Original) Certificate of Title No. ______ issued by the Register of
Deeds of Makati;
The VENDOR, for and in consideration of the amount of _________________ Pesos (P_____), to
him paid by VENDEE and receipt of which is acknowledged, does hereby SELL, TRANSFER and CONVEY
under pacto de retro unto the said VENDEE, his heirs and assigns, the property with all the buildings and
improvements thereon, free from all liens and encumbrances whatsoever;
The VENDOR, in executing this conveyance, hereby reserves the right to REPURCHASE, and the
VENDEE, in accepting the same, hereby obligates himself to RESELL the property herein conveyed within
a period of ____ years from date of this deed for the same price of ______________ (P____); Provided,
however, that if the VENDOR shall fail to exercise his right to repurchase as herein granted within the
period provided, then this conveyance shall become absolute and irrevocable, without need of a new
Deed of Absolute Sale, subject to the requirements of law regarding consolidation of ownership of real
property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this deed this 7th day of July, 2007 at Makati City.
MA YA MAN
Vendor
MA GU LANG
Vendee
65
)
) s.s.
DEED OF RESALE
[Note: if vendor is married, marital consent must be secured; thus, the Deed must also indicate this. If
vendor is married, then add the following:]
With my consent:
BA TAPA
Vendors Wife
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
(Sgd.) MIRON 1
(Sgd.) MIRON 2
PLUS: Acknowledgment
66
)
) s.s.
DEED OF SALE WITH MORTGAGE
This Deed of Sale with Pacto de Retro made and executed by and between:
MA YA MAN, Filipino, of legal age, married to ASA WA, with residence at
___________________ (VENDOR-MORTGAGEE),
- and MA GU LANG, Filipino, of legal age, married to BA TAPA, with residence
at ____________ (VENDEE-MORTGAGOR);
WITNESSETH: That
The VENDOR-MORTGAGEE is the absolute owner of a certain parcel of land with all the buildings
and improvements thereon, situated in the City of Makati, and more particular ly described, as follows:
(Copy technical description in TCT/OCT)
his title thereto shown by Transfer (or Original) Certificate of Title No. ______ issued by the Register of
Deeds of Makati;
The VENDOR, for and in consideration of the amount of _________________ Pesos (P_____), to
him paid by VENDEE and receipt of which is acknowledged, does hereby SELL, TRANSFER and CONVEY
unto the said VENDEE, his heirs and assigns, the property with all the buildings and improvements
thereon, free from all liens and encumbrances whatsoever;
It is hereby agreed and stipulated that the UNPAID BALANCE OF ____________ Pesos (P____),
of which amount _________________Pesos (P_____) shall be paid by the VENDEE-MORTGAGOR to the
VENDOR-MORTGAGEE at the latters residence, as follows:
(State manner of payment)
In order to guarantee the fulfillment of the above obligations, the VENDEE-MORTGAGOR does
hereby MORTGAGE unto the said VENDOR-MORTGAGEE, his heirs and assigns, the property described,
together with all the buildings and improvements thereon, under the express stipulation that if the said
VENDEE-MORTGAGOR shall pay or cause to be paid unto the VENDOR-MORTGAGEE the obligations, then
this Mortgage shall be of no further force and effect; otherwise, the same shall remain in full force and
effect and shall be enforceable in the manner prescribed by law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this deed this 7th day of July, 2007 at Makati City.
MA YA MAN
Vendor
MA GU LANG
Vendee
With my consent:
ASA WA
Vendors Wife
With my consent:
BA TAPA
Vendees Wife
67
ALANG MALAY
Assignors Wife
DAMI LUPA
Assignee
With my marital consent:
PLUS: Acknowledgment
68
BIL MOKO
Assignees Wife
S. Chattel Mortgage
Republic of the Philippines
Makati City
)
) s.s.
CHATTEL MORTGAGE
of which I am the true and absolute owner by title thereto, being evidenced by Registration Certificate of
Motor Vehicle No. ______ issued in my name by the Land Transportation Office on
__________________.
This chattel mortgage has been executed in order to secure the full and faithful payment of my
obligation to YAMAN NYA in accordance with the terms and conditions of this instrument; Upon payment,
this contract shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall continue in full force and effect and may be
foreclosed in accordance with law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument on 7 July 2007 at Makati City.
DAMI KOTSE
Affidavit of Good Faith
We severally swear that DAMI KOTSE, mortgagor, and YAMAN NYA, mortgagee, have executed
the foregoing Chattel Mortgage in order to guarantee as good and binding the obligations mentioned
above and is not intended to defraud creditors.
YAMAN NYA
DAMI KOTSE
Signed in the presence of:
UZI 1
UZI 2
PLUS: Acknowledgment
69
VII.
c.
70
71
MODEL PETITION:
I. WRIT OF AMPARO
[A] CAPTION AND TITLE
Republic of the Philippines
(COURT)
(Location)
Name of Aggrieved Party or
Relator,
Petitioner,
(Case No. _____________)
- versus -
1.2.
Security of Person or
1.3.
1.4.
2. Respondent/s is/are . . .
2.1. Personal/Professional Circumstances Relevant
2.2. Contact Details
2.3. Other Relevant Details
[C] BODY
3. Statement of Facts
3.1. Chronology of Events Relevant to the right violated (e.g., enforced disappear ance or
extrajudicial killing)
3.2. Statement as to Judicial Affidavits (if any) of witnesses
3.3. Statement as to efforts exerted to vindicate the right/s and results of such efforts
4. Statement of Material Facts Relevant to Interim Reliefs (if any)
a.
b.
c.
d.
RELIEF
WHEREFORE, . . .
(a) Interim Reliefs be granted immediately
(b) Final Reliefs be granted after hearing
72
73
X ---------------------------------------- X
PETITION
1.2.
or Security or Threat
1.3.
1.4.
2. Respondent/s is/are . . .
2.1. Personal/Professional Circumstances Relevant
2.2. Contact Details
2.3. Other Relevant Details
[C] BODY
3. Statement of Facts
3.1. Chronology of Events Relevant to the right violated (e.g., enforced disappear ance or
extrajudicial killing)
3.2. Statement as to Judicial Affidavits (if any) of witnesses
3.3. Statement as to efforts exerted to vindicate the right/s and results of such efforts
4. Statement of Material Facts Relevant to any Interim Reliefs (if any)
5. Statement of Material Facts Relevant to Final Relief/s
[D]
RELIEF
WHEREFORE, . . .
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
relator to victim)
74
75
MODEL RETURN
I. AMPARO
[A] CAPTION AND TITLE
[B] PARTIES
[C] BODY
76
77