CIVIL PROCEDURE AUGUST 3, 2019

1. What if no legal representative is named by the counsel

for the deceased party, or if the one so named shall fail
to appear within the specified period? Explain.
If no legal representative is named by the counsel of the deceased party or if there is
but fails to appear within a specified period, the court may order the opposing party
to procure the appointment of an executor or administrator for the estate of the
deceased and the latter shall immediately appear for and on behalf of the deceased.
The court charges in procuring such appointment, if defrayed by the opposing party,
may be recovered as cost. (Rule 3, Sec.16 4th par.)

2. Ramon, claiming to be the President of PRRD

Corporation, filed an action to collect the sum of money
from Samson. The only attachment to the Complaint is
the promissory note signed by Samson. If you were the
counsel of Samson, and being a graduate of Misamis
University, what will you do to advance the interest of
your client? Explain.
If I were the counsel of Samson, I would advise him to raise a timely disavowal under
oath with specificity as to the genuiness and due execution of the said actionable
document and set forth facts pertaining to such disavowal. (Rule 8, Sec.8)

3. L executed a will naming O as one of the devisees. Upon

L’s death a petition for the probate of his will was filed
with the RTC. During the pendency of the probate
proceedings, O died intestate. The Q law firm entered its
appearance as counsel for F, who claimed to be one of
the heirs of O and their representative. The probate
court allowed the appearance of the counsel and the
substitution of O by F, who had been designated by the
other heirs as their representative in the probate court.
E opposed the appearance and the substitution on the
ground that under Lawas v. CA, 143 SCRA 173
(1986), priority is given to the legal representative of
the deceased, (i.e. the executor or administrator, or in
case where the heirs resort to an extrajudicial
settlement of the estate that the court may adopt the
 alternative of allowing the heirs to be substituted for the
deceased. Was the substitution of the deceased O by F
proper? Explain.
Yes. Under the rule, the heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for
the deceased without requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator.
(Rule 3, Sec. 16 2nd par.)

4. P filed an action to recover possession and ownership of

a parcel of land against D. during the pendency of the
case P died but substitution by his heirs was effected.
The trial court ruled in favor of P. D assert that the
RTC’s decision was invalid for lack of jurisdiction, since
the heirs were not substituted for the deceased P. P’s
heirs, however, participated in the trial without being
substituted. Was the trial court’s decision valid? Explain.
Yes, in spite of the general rule provided under Rule 3, Sec .16, a formal substitution of
heirs is not necessary when they themselves voluntarily appear, participate in the
case, and present evidence in behalf of the deceased. Thus, when due process is not
violated in consonance with the Rule, such substitution in the case presented cannot
affect the validity of a promulgated decision.

5. P filed an action to recover possession of a parcel of land

against D. during the pendency of the case, D died. P
advised the court of D’s death and filed a motion for
substitution but the court did not issue an order for the
substation of D. The heirs possessed the land. Judgment
was rendered in favor of P. May P enforce the judgment
against the heirs?[5] Explain.
No, the right to due process of the heirs of D were violated when they were not given
the chance to defend their side in court. Hence, failure to substitute the heirs for the
deceased defendant deprived the court of jurisdiction to enforce its decision against
them.

6. In the preceding problem, would your answer be the

same if the heirs voluntarily appeared in court and
participated in the proceedings therein?[6] Explain.
No, my answer would not be the same. Voluntary appearance of the heirs and their
participation in the proceeding therein cured the defect of lack of substitution.
7. P filed an action to recover possession of parcel of land
against D. during the pendency of the case, D died. D’s
counsel failed to inform the court of D’s death. The heirs
possessed the land. Judgment was rendered in favor of
P. May P enforce the judgment against the heirs?
[7]
Explain.
Yes. In the case presented, D’s counsel failed to inform the court of his client’s death.
Thus, it may not be faulted for proceeding to render judgement without ordering his
substitution. Its judgement is thus valid and binding to D’s legal representatives,
insofar as his interest in the property subject of the action is concerned.

8. P filed an action for quieting of title with damages

against D. during the pendency of the case, a notice of
hearing sent to D was returned with the notation “party-
deceased.” D’s counsel still continued to appear for D
and did not inform the court of D’s death. Judgment was
rendered in favor of P ordering D to vacate the land and
return possession to P. The heirs of D, who are now in
possession, contend that the judgment was void since
there was no substitution. Are they correct?[8] Explain.
No, the failure of the counsel to comply with his duty under the Rule on informing the
court of his client’s death and the non-substitution of such party will not invalidate the
proceedings and its judgement thereon if the action survives after the death of such
party. The notation “Party-Deceased” on the unserved notices could not be the
“proper notice” contemplated by the Rule. Hence, the court was within its jurisdiction
to proceed with the case without any irregularities in its proceedings.

9. A filed a complaint for the recovery of ownership of land

against B who was represented by her counsel X. in the
course of the trial, B died. However, X failed to notify
the court of B’s death. The court proceeded to hear the
case and rendered judgment against B. after judgment
became final, a writ of execution was issued against C,
who being B’s sole heir, acquired the property. (1) If
you were counsel of C, what course of action would you
take?[9] Explain. (2) Did the failure of X to inform the
court of B’s death constitute direct contempt?[10] Explain.
9.1. If I were the counsel of C, I would file a motion to set aside the writ of execution.
The Supreme Court held that failure to substitute the heirs for the deceased
defendant deprived the court of jurisdiction to enforce its decision for it violated
their right to due process. (G.R. No. L-11567, 17 July 1958)

9.2 No. Direct contempt is misbehavior in the presence of or so near a court as to

obstruct or interrupt the proceedings before the same. This misbehavior would
however amount to indirect contempt as it was a misbehavior of an officer of the
court in the performance of his official duties. (Rule 71)

10. P filed an action for recovery of a parcel of land against

D. the trial court dismissed the case prompting P to appeal
to the CA. Pending appeal, P died. The lawyer of P gave
notice to the CA of P’s death and moved for the suspension
of the period to file appellant’s brief pending the
appointment of an administrator of P’s estate in the
probate proceedings. The CA denied the motion for
suspension and dismissed P’s appeal for failure to file the
appellant’s brief. Was the CA correct?[11] Explain.
No. The death of P extinguished the lawyer-client relationship and hence the lawyer
had no more authority to act in the case save to notify the court and give the names
and addresses of the legal representative. The CA should thus have suspended the
period to file the appellant’s brief until a legal representative was appointed and the
order of substitution made.

11. What is the Rule in case a party becomes incompetent

or incapacitated?[12] Explain.
Under S18 R3 of the Rules of Court, in case a party becomes incompetent or
incapacitated, the court, upon motion with notice, may allow the action to be
continued by or against the incompetent or incapacitated person assisted by his legal
guardian or guardian ad litem.

12. What is the effect of a transfer of interest during the

pendency of the litigation?[13] Explain.
The action may be continued by or against the original party, unless the court upon
motion directs the transferee to be substituted in the action or joined with the original
party.
13. P filed with the RTC an action to collect a loan of
P500,000 from D. P was able to obtain a writ of attachment
and attached a property of D. During the pendency of the
case, D died. (a) Should the case be dismissed? [14] Explain.
(b) D was substituted by his heir X. P won the case and no
appeal was made by X may P move for the execution of the
judgment against X?[15] Explain. (c) P filed the judgment as
a money claim with the probate court. Does the writ of
attachment entitle P to preference over the other creditors
in respect of the property attached?[16] Explain.
a.) No, the case should be allowed to continue until final judgment. S20 R3 provides
that when the action is for recovery of money arising from contract, express or
implied, and the defendant dies before the entry of final judgment, the action shall
not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment.
D should be substituted by his legal representative or heir.

b.) No. Under S20 R3, the favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff shall be
enforced in the manner especially provided in the Rules for prosecuting claims against
teh estate of a deceased person. P should file the judgment award in the proceedings
for the settlement of the estate of D as a money claim pursuant to R86.

Yes. The writ of attachment was not dissolved since the main action was not dismissed
but continues until final judgment. Hence, P is a preferred creditor over the property
attached.

14. P filed with the RTC an action for recovery of

possession of a parcel of land against D. D died while the
case was pending and was substituted by his heir X who
had succeeded D in the possession of the land. P won the
case and no appeal was made by X. May P move for the
execution of the judgment against X?[17] Explain.

15. P filed an action for tort against D who had negligently

inflicted injuries upon P. D died during the pendency of the
case and was substituted by his heir X. judgment was
rendered in favor of P for P500,000. No appeal was filed by
X. May P move for the execution of the judgment against
X?[18]Explain.
16. P filed a complaint for sum of money against D. during
the pendency of the case, D died. Intestate proceedings for
the settlement of the D’s estate commenced and notice to
the estate’s creditors was given for them to file their claim
within six months from the first publication of the notice. A
month thereafter, on P’s motion, the administrator of D’s
estate was substituted for D in the civil case for collection.
The court rendered judgment in favor of P and D’s
administrator appealed. P filed a contingent claim covering
the judgment award in the probate court. At the time of
the filing of the contingent claim, the 6-month period for
creditors to file their claim had expired. In due course the
judgment in favor of P was affirmed on appeal and became
final and thus P moved that the estate be ordered to pay P.
The administrator opposed the motion on the ground that
the claim is time-barred since the contingent claim was
filed beyond the statute of non-claims. Is the claim of P
time-barred?[19] Explain.

17. (a) P sued to recover an unpaid loan and was awarded

P333,000 by the RTC of Manila. D did not appeal within the
period allowed by law. He died six days after the lapse of
the period. Forthwith, a petition for the settlement of his
estate was properly filed in the RTC of Pampanga where an
inventory of his assets was filed and correspondingly
approved. Thereafter, P filed a motion for execution with
the Manila court, contending therein that the motion was
legally justified because the defendant died after the
judgment in the Manila court had become final. Resolve the
motion.[20] (b) Under the same facts as (a), a writ of
execution was issued by the Manila RTC upon proper
motion three days after the lapse of the period to appeal.
The corresponding levy on execution was duly effected on
defendant’s parcel of land worth P666,000 a day before the
defendant died. Would it be proper, on motion, to lift the
levy on D’s property?[21] State the reasons for your answer.
18. Spouses B and C were the owners of a residential and
boarding house with a market value of more than
P300,000. Their total earnings were more than double the
minimum wage of an employee. When the city demolished
their residence and boarding house, B and C filed an action
for damages with the RTC against the city. They applied for
exemption from the docket and legal fees as indigents.
They are disqualified to litigate as indigents since they have
not met the salary and property requirements under
S19R141. May B and C still be exempted from paying the
docket and legal fees as pauper litigants even though they
do not meet the requirements under S19R141?[22] Explain.

19. What is the Rule in case of death or separation of a

party who is a public officer?[23] Explain.

20. What is the Rule when an action involves the validity of

any treaty, law, ordinance, executive order, presidential
decree, rules or regulations?[24]Explain.

21. In 2001, The Municipality of X enacted an Ordinance

prohibiting persons below the age of 18 outside of their
house from 8:00 in the evening to 4:00 in the morning. J,
a resident of one of the barangays of X was arrested while
walking in the street on September 4, 2016 and was
prosecuted for violation of the Ordinance, in the MTC of X.
The judge of the MTC issued an Order which required the
Office of the Solicitor General to appear and be heard as
regards the validity of the Ordinance of X. Was the judge
correct?[25] Explain.

22. Define venue.[26]

Venue refers to the possible or proper place or places for the trial of a suit, as among
several places where jurisdiction could be established.

23. What is the difference between jurisdiction and venue?

[27]
 Jurisdiction deals with the authority of a court to exercise judicial power while venue
deals with the place where that power should be exercised.

24. Is venue jurisdictional?[28]

In a civil case venue is not jurisdictional. However in a criminal cases it is.

25. Distinguish real action from personal action. [29]

A real action is an action affecting title to or possession of a real property or interest
therein. Any other action is a personal action.

26. What is the venue of real action?[30]

Real action shall be commenced and tried in the in the proper court which has
jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is
situated.

27. What is the venue of personal actions?[31]

Personal actions may be commenced and tried where the plaintiff or any of the
principal plaintiffs resides or where defendant or any of the principal defendants
resides at the election of the plaintiff.

28. In what instances that the Rule on venue would not be

applicable?[32]Explain.
Section 4. When Rule not applicable.- This Rule shall not apply.

a. In those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise; or

b. Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of action on the
exclusive venue thereof.

29. Gary who lived in Taguig borrowed P1 million from Rey

who lived in Makati under a contract of loan that fixed
Makati as the venue of any action arising from the contract.
Gary had already paid the loan but Rey kept on sending him
letters of demand for some balance. Where is the venue of
the action for harassment that Gary wants to file against
Rey?[33] (A) In Makati since the intent of the party is to make
it the venue of any action between them whether based on
the contract or not. (B) In Taguig or Makati at the option of
Gary since it is a personal injury action. (C) In Taguig since
Rey received the letters of demand there. (D) In Makati
since it is the venue fixed in their contract.

30. For purposes of the Rule on venue, what is the residence

of a corporation?[34] Explain.
The residence of a corporation is it's principal place of business, not it's branch office.

31. D, and American citizen, borrowed P500,000 from P, a

Filipino citizen while vacationing in the Philippines. D failed
to pay. D went to the U.S. May P file a suit against D?
[35]
Explain.

32. P filed an action with the RTC of Bulacan, where he

resides, against M and F for the dissolution of their
partnership. The main asset of the partnership was a
fishpond located in Marinduque. M and F filed an answer in
which they alleged that the partnership had so far been
unproductive and that this was the result of P’s failure to
contribute his share. They counterclaimed for damages.
Consequently, the court granted the intervention of Z, who
alleged that they had bought the fishpond and were now its
owners. Z then filed a motion to dismiss upon the ground
that venue was improperly laid? (a) Should the motion to
dismiss be granted?[36] Explain. (b) If the action filed by P
against M and F were a real action affecting title over the
fishpond, would your answer still be the same? [37]Explain.

33. P filed a complaint against the surety with the RTC of

Manila. The surety then filed a third-party complaint
against X, who had executed an indemnity agreement
undertaking to indemnify the surety in case it becomes
liable under the surety bond. X filed a motion to dismiss
the third party complaint on the ground of improper venue.
X pointed out that the indemnity agreement between the
surety and X contains a provision that any suit arising from
the agreement shall be solely and exclusively filed in
Quezon City. Should the court dismiss the third party
complaint?[38]Explain.
No, a third-party complaint is ancillary to the main case thus a third party complaint
has to yield to the jurisdiction and venue of the main action.

34. P filed a complaint for annulment of contracts of loan

with cancellation of Real Estate Mortgage against D in
Pasig, the place where P had its office. P alleged that the
contract of loan was without the knowledge of the
corporation. D moved to dismiss the complaint on the
ground that the annulment of the REM is a real action,
since P sought to compel D to accept its payment and thus
affecting title over the property and free it from the
encumbrance. Thus it should have been filed in Quezon
City, where the encumbered properties are located. Is a
complaint for cancellation of REM a real action? [39] Explain.
No, the instant action to annual a contract and it's accessory remember is a personal
action.an action and it's accessory rem is a personal action if the mortgagee has not
foreclosed the mortgage and the mortgagor is still in possession of the premises as his
title to or possession of the premises as his title to or possession of the property is not
in dispute.

35. When is Rule 4 on venue of actions not applicable? [40]

 In those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise.
 Where the parties have validity agreed I. Writing before the filling of the action
on the exclusive venue thereof.

36. Give examples of cases where a specific rule or law

provides otherwise.[41]
1. Civil and criminal actions for libel shall be filed with the regional trial court
having jurisdiction over the place where the libelous article is printed and first
published or where any of the offended parties actually resides at the time of the
commission of the offense.

2. Petitions for declaration of nullity and annulment of marriage shall be filled In

the family court of the province or city where the petitioner or respondent has been
residing for at least 6months prior to the date filling. Or in case of non-resident
respondent, where he may be found in the Philippines, at the declaration of absolute
nullity of void marriages and annulment of voidable marriages
37. P applied for 6 cellular phone subscription with Piltel. P
later filed with the RTC of Iligan City a complaint for sum of
money and damages against Piltel. The latter moved to
dismiss on the ground of improper venue, citing the
common provision in the subscription agreements which
provides that: Venue of all suits arising from this
agreement shall be in the proper courts of Makati City.
Subscriber expressly waives any other venue. Should the
motion to dismiss be granted?[42] Explain.
Yes , the exclusive venue provision was held valid by SC.SC distinguished this case from
Sweet Lines vs. Teves, in which the plaintiffs were virtually compelled to buy tickets
from the sweet lines otherwise they would be stranded in Bohol. Here, the plaintiff
had unfettered freedom to sign or not sign the subscription agreement.

38. PB Com Filed a collection case against D before the RTC

of Manila, PB Com’s place of business, based on the Surety
Agreement (SA) executed by D in relation to a credit line
PB Com extended to International Trading Company.
However, in this promissory note executed by ITC, it was
expressly stipulated that the “venue” for any legal action
that may arise out of the said Promissory Note shall be
Makati to the exclusion of all other courts.” D moved to
dismiss on the ground of improper venue. Can PB Com file
the collection case in Manila, where the Surety Agreement
is silent on the venue?[43]

39. Respondent entered into a payroll agreement with the

bank. The agreement contained a venue stipulation which
reads thus: “In case of litigation, venue shall be in the
proper trial courts of Manila for determination of any and
all questions arising here under.” A dispute arising from the
payroll agreement between Respondent and the bank
ensued. Respondent filed an action for damages with the
RTC of Quezon City where he resides. The bank filed a
motion to dismiss on the ground of improper venue. Should
the motion to dismiss be granted?[44]
40. After working for 25 years in the Middle East, Evan
returned to the Philippines to retire in Manila, the place of
his birth and childhood. Ten years before his retirement, he
bought for cash in his name a house and lot in Malate,
Manila. Six months after his return, he learned that his
house and lot were the subject of foreclosure proceedings
commenced by ABC Bank on the basis of a promissory note
and a deed of real estate mortgage he had allegedly
executed in favor of ABC Bank five years earlier. Knowing
that he was not in the country at the time the promissory
note and deed of mortgage were supposedly executed,
Evan forthwith initiated a complaint in the RTC of Manila
praying that the subject documents be declared null and
void. ABC Bank filed.a motion to dismiss Evan's complaint
on the ground of improper venue on the basis of a
stipulation in both documents designating Quezon City as
the exclusive venue in the event of litigation between the
parties arising out of the loan and mortgage. Should the
motion to dismiss of ABC Bank be granted? [45] Explain your
answer.

41. A and B, both residents of Kapatagan, Lanao del Norte,

agreed that in the event of violation of their agreement,
the actions may be filed in the RTC of Ozamiz considering
that the value of the loan was P350,000.00. B violated the
agreement. A filed an action to collect in Ozamis RTC in
accordance to their agreement. B filed a motion to dismiss
arguing that Ozamiz RTC is not the proper venue of the
case. A, in his opposition, cited their agreement. If you
were the judge, will you grant the motion of B? [46]Explain.

42. A and B, both residents of Ozamiz City, in their loan

agreement, stipulated the following: “In case of litigation
hereunder, venue shall be in the City Court or RTC of
Iligan, as the case may be for determination of any and all
questions arising thereunder.” A violated the terms of the
agreement. B sued A in Iligan City Court. A filed a motion
to dismiss alleging improper venue. If you were the judge,
will you dismiss the case?[47] Explain.

43. When may the ground of improper venue be raised by

the defendant?[48]

44. May the trial court dismiss a complaint motu propio on

the ground of improper venue?[49]

45. What civil cases are governed by the Rule o Summary

Procedure?[50]

46. What are the pleadings allowed under the Rule on

Summary Procedure?[51]

47. What are the prohibited pleadings, motions, and

petitions under the Rule on Summary Procedure?[52]

48. In an ejectment case, the court dismissed the

complaint for failure of the plaintiff to appear during the
preliminary conference. The plaintiff filed a motion for
reconsideration of the dismissal order. The defendant
contends that the dismissal had become final and
executory since the motion for reconsideration is a
prohibited pleading and hence does not suspend the
reglementary period to appeal. Is the Defendant’s
contention correct?[53]Explain.

49. P filed with the MeTC of Manila a suit against D to

collect the sum of P100,000. The MeTC rendered judgment
in favor of P. D appealed to the RTC which affirmed the
challenged decision. D filed with the CA a motion for
extension of 15 days to file a petition for review. May P in
the meantime move for the execution of the judgment as a
matter of right?[54] Explain.

50. What cases are governed by the Rule of Procedure for

Small Claims Cases?[55]
 51. When shall the MTC apply the Rule of procedure for
Small Claims Cases?[56]
Yes, MTC shall apply the rule of procedure for small claims cases for up to three
hundred thousand pesos exclusive of interests and costs.

52. Are the Rules of Civil Procedure applicable to small

claims cases?[57]
Yes the Rules of Civil Procedure shall apply in all actions which are:

(a) Purely civil in nature where the claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for
payment or reimbursement of sum of money, and

(b) The civil aspect of criminal actions, either filed before the institution of the criminal
action, or reserved upon the filing of the criminal action in court, pursuant to Rule 111
of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.

53. What are the prohibited pleadings and motions in small

claims cases?[58]
These are the prohibited pleadings and motions in small claim cases as per listed in
section 14 of the Rules of procedure for small claims cases:

xxx

SEC. 14. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions. — The following pleadings, motions, or
petitions shall not be allowed in the cases covered by this Rule:

(a)Motion to dismiss the complaint;

(b)Motion for a bill of particulars;
(c)Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for reopening of trial;
(d)Petition for relief from judgment;
(e)Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other paper;
(f)Memoranda;
(g)Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order
issued by the court;
(h)Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(i)Dilatory motions for postponement;
(j)Reply;
(k)Third-party complaints; and
(l)Interventions.

54. Are decisions in small claims cases appealable? [59]

After the hearing, the decision will be final and unappeasable. (Section 23 of Rules of
Procedure for Small Claims Cases)

55. Define pleadings.[60]

Pleadings are written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the parties
submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.

56. What are the pleading allowed by the Rules of Court? [61]
The pleadings allowed by the Rules of Court are as follows:

 Complaint – alleging the plaintiff’s cause of action

 Answer – a defending party sets forth his defenses
 Defenses – may be negative (specific denial of the material of fact/s alleged);
or affirmative (hypothetically admitting the material allegations in the
pleadings of the claimant)
 Counterclaim – defending party may have against an opposing party
 Compulsory counterclaim
 Cross-claim – any claim by one party against a co-party
 Counter-counterclaims or counter-crossclaims
 Reply – which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of new matters
alleged
 Third, (fourth, etc.) – party complaint – defending party may file against a
person not a party to the action
 Answer to third (fourth, etc.) –party complaint

57. What is a complaint?[62]

Complaint is the first pleading filed with the court by party called the plaintiff.

58. What is an answer?[63]

Answer is a responsive pleading to the complaint. It gives notice to the plaintiff as to
which allegations in the complaint the defendant decides to contest and put in issue.

59. Co Batong, a Taipan, filed a civil action for damages

with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Parañaque City
against Jose Penduko, a news reporter of the Philippine
Times, a newspaper of general circulation printed and
published in Parañaque City. The complaint alleged, among
others, that Jose Penduko wrote malicious and defamatory
imputations against Co Batong; that Co Batong’s business
address is in Makati City; and that the libelous article was
first printed and published in Parañaque City. The
complaint prayed that Jose Penduko be held liable to pay
P200, 000.00, as moral damages; P150,000.00, as
exemplary damages; and P50,000.00, as attorney’s fees.
Jose Penduko filed a Motion to Dismiss on the following
grounds: 1. The RTC is without jurisdiction because under
the Totality Rule, the claim for damages in the amount of
P350, 000.00 fall within the exclusive original jurisdiction of
the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Parañaque City. 2.
The venue is improperly laid because what the complaint
alleged is Co Batong’s business address and not his
residence address. Are the grounds invoked in the Motion
to Dismiss proper?[64]
(Bar Question 2014)

No, the grounds invoked by Jose Penduko in his motion to dismiss is unfitting.

1. The invocation of the Totality rule is misplaced. Under Art 360 of the RPC,
jurisdiction over a civil action for damages in cases of libel is with the RTC.
(Nocum v. Tan 23 Sept 2005). The said provision does not mention any
jurisdictional amount over such action. Hence, Totality Rule does not apply.
2. The Ground that the complaint mentioned the complainant’s office address
rather than his residence is of no moment since the complaint also stated that
the libelous article was printed and first published in Paranaque City. Under Art.
360 of the RPC, venue in civil actions for libel also lies in the place where the
libelous article was printed and first published.

60. What are the kinds of defenses?[65] Define and Explain.

A negative defense is an attack on a plaintiff's prima facie case, a defense that directly
contradicts elements of the plaintiff's claim for relief. In contrast, an affirmative defense
is an implicit admission of the factual allegations in the complaint, but avoids liability, in
whole or in part, based on additional allegations of excuse, justification or other
negating matters.

61. Give examples of affirmative defenses.[66]

Fraud, prescription, release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former
recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other matter by way of confession and
avoidance. Some of these defences are also grounds for a motion to dismiss.

62. P filed a complaint against B and C who are made co-

defendants. C files an answer serving a copy thereof upon
P. Does C also need to serve a copy upon B?[67] Explain.
No, C does not need to serve a copy upon B. A co-defendant does not need to serve a
copy of the answer against a co-defendant, except where there is a cross-claim in the
answer or in case of S5 R62 in interpleader where the conflicting claimants should
serve a copy of the answer on their co-defendants.

63. What is a counterclaim?[68]

A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing
party.

64. P files a case against D. D files a counterclaim against

P. May P file a counterclaim against D’s counterclaim?
[69]
Explain.
Yes, P may file a counterclaim against D’s counterclaim. A counterclaim may be
asserted against an original counterclaimant as provided in Sec. 6 of Rule 6 of the 1997
Rules of Civil Procedure

65. The Republic, through the PCCG and with the

assistance of the Office of the Solicitor General, filed with
the Sandiganbayan a complaint against Cojuangco and
Enrile for reconveyance and damages. Subsequently Enrile
was granted leave of court to implead Solicitor General
Chavez as a defendant in a counterclaim for filing a
harassment suit. Was the filing of the counterclaim against
OSG Chavez proper?[70] Explain.
No. A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing
party. Chavez was not the opposing party but merely the counsel of the opposing
party. Enrile has to file a separate suit if he wants to claim damages against Chavez.

66. H filed with the RTC a complaint against D for

damages. The RTC, after due proceedings, rendered a
decision granting the complaint and ordering D to pay
damages to H. D timely filed an appeal before the CA,
questioning the RTC decision. Meanwhile, the RTC granted
H’s motion for execution pending appeal. Upon receipt of
the RTC’s order granting execution pending appeal, D filed
with the CA another case, this time a special civil action for
certiorari assailing the said RTC order. Is there a violation
of the rule against forum shopping considering that the two
(2) actions emanating from the same case with the RTC
were filed by D with the CA?[71] Explain.

67. Is there an instance wherein a counterclaim may be

asserted by the defending party against one who is not an
opposing party?[72] Explain.
Yes. Under Sec. 13 of Rule 6, a third-party defendant may in proper cases assert a
counterclaim against the original plaintiff in respect of the latter's claim against the
third-party plaintiff.

68. What are the kinds of counterclaims?[73]

The kinds of counterclaims are compulsory and permissive.

69. What is a compulsory counterclaim?[74]

A compulsory counterclaim is one which, being cognizable by the regular courts of
justice, arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence constituting
the subject matter of the opposing party's claim and does not require for its
adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire
jurisdiction. Such a counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to
the amount and the nature thereof, except that in an original action before the
Regional Trial Court, the counterclaim may be considered compulsory regardless of
the amount.

70. Distinguish a compulsory counterclaim from a

permissive counterclaim.[75]
 71. Why is a compulsory counterclaim termed as such? [76]

72. What is the reason behind S2R9?[77]

73. How should a compulsory counterclaim or crossclaim be

set up?[78]

74. May a compulsory counterclaim be set up in a motion

to dismiss?[79]Explain.

75. What are the requirements in order that a counterclaim

may be considered compulsory?[80] Explain.

76. P files a suit for sum of money in the sum of P500,000

against D in the RTC of Ozamis City. Assuming that D’s
counterclaim arises out of or is connected to the
transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of
P’s claim, can D file a counterclaim: (a) For ejectment?
[81]
(b) For support?[82] (c) For sum of money in the sum of
P250,000?[83] (d) For infringement of D’s patent?[84] And (e)
For delivery of title over a subdivision lot which P, as a
subdivision developer, sold to D?[85]

77. P filed a suit for nullification of a promissory note

against D on the ground of usurious and unconscionable
interest rates. D counterclaimed for the payment of the
P1M loan with interest. He however did not pay the docket
fees. Should the counterclaim be dismissed for failure to
pay docket fees?[86] Explain.
78. Carlos executed a promissory note in the sum of
P400,000.00 in favour of Helen and payable on September 2,
2017. Norma acted as Carlo’s co-maker. Carlos failed to pay as
scheduled. Helen comes to you, being a graduate of Misamis
University, and sought your legal advice on what to do inorder
to collect from Carlos. Her querries are: (a) What are the steps
to do before filing the action in court? (5 points) Explain; (b)
Where is the venue of the action? (5 points) Explain; and (c)
Which has jurisdiction over the action? (5 points).
79. Based on the preceding problem and assuming that Norma
engaged you as her counsel, what will you do to protect her?
Explain.

80. F filed a collection suit for P387,000 against R in the

RTC of Davao City. Aside from alleging payment as a
defense, R in his answer set up counterclaims for P100,000
as damages and P30,000 as attorney’s fees as a result of
the baseless filing of the complaint, as well as for P250,000
as the balance of the purchase price of 30 units of
airconditioners he sold to F. Does RTC have jurisdiction
over R’s counterclaims and if so does he have to pay
docket fees therefore?[87] Explain.

81. D and P entered into a lease contract whereby D leased

Room 401 to P. P was of the impression that the lease also
covered the rooftop of Room 442. However D padlocked
the way to the rooftop. D insisted that the lease only
covered Room 401 and that P’s use of the rooftop was
merely tolerated. P tendered the lease payment to D who
refused to accept the same. P then filed an action for
consignation with the MTC against D. D then filed an
answer with counterclaim for unlawful detainer against P.
The CA ruled that the raising of the counterclaim for
ejectment was improper since such could only be initiated
by a verified complaint pursuant to S4R70. Was the filing of
the counterclaim proper?[88] Explain.

82. P filed with the MeTC of Makati a complaint against D to

recover possession of a parcel of land with an assessed
value of P60,000. D filed an answer. The MeTC tried the
case on the merits and rendered a decision in favor of P. D
appealed to the RTC. Assume the RTC does not dismiss the
appeal and proceed to take cognizance thereof. D filed a
motion to admit amended answer in which he raises a
counterclaim for P250,000 against P which arose out of the
same transaction subject matter of the complaint. May the
court admit the amended answer?[89] Explain.
83. P filed with the RTC an action for recovery of land
against D. D filed an answer raising the defense of
ownership. RTC decided for D. On appeal the CA reversed
the RTC and decided for P declaring him as owner of the
land and ordering D to vacate the land. The CA declared
that there was no fraud or bad faith on the part of D. the
CA’s judgment became final and executory. P moved for
the execution of the judgment before the RTC. D opposed
on the ground that a hearing supplementary to the
execution should be conducted to allow them to present
evidence to prove that they are builders in good faith and
to prove the value of the improvements. (a) Should the
RTC grant the opposition of D?[90] (b) May D file a separate
action to recover the value of the improvements introduced
by them?[91]Explain.

84. A sues L for recovery of a parcel of land. L seeks in turn

to be reimbursed of the value of improvements she had
introduced on the same land and the payment of damages
she had sustained. Should L file a separate action against A
for that purpose?[92] Explain.

85. Would the dismissal of the main complaint also result in

the dismissal of the counterclaim?[93] Explain.

86. What is the “compelling test of compulsoriness” to

determine whether a claim is compulsory?[94] Explain.

87. Abraham filed a complaint for damages in the amount

of P750,000.00 against Salvador in the RTC in Quezon City
for the latter's alleged breach of their contract of services.
Salvador promptly filed his answer, and included a
counterclaim for P250,000.00 arising from the allegedly
baseless and malicious claims of Abraham that compelled
him to litigate and to engage the services of counsel, and
thus caused him to suffer mental anguish. Noting that the
amount of the counterclaim was below the exclusive
original jurisdiction of the RTC, Abraham filed a motion to
dismiss vis-a-vis the counterclaim on that ground. Should
the counterclaim of Salvador be dismissed? [95] Explain your
answer.

88. FBC was engaged by U to construct a multi-level

apartment building in Forbes Park. Forbes Park Association
(FPA) suspended all entry permits of the construction after
discovering that the same was violative of the subdivision’s
deed of restriction. FBC filed an action for injunction and
damages against FPA. FPA filed a motion to dismiss on the
ground that U, not FBC was the real party in interest. It
was granted which became final. Later on FPA filed an
action against FBC to remove the structures it built and for
damages. (a) If you were the counsel for FBC, what would
you do?[96] Explain. (b) If you were the counsel for FPA,
instead of filing a motion to dismiss, what would you have
done?[97] Explain. (c) Assume that no motion to dismiss was
filed by FBC in the second case and the RTC decided for
FPA. On appeal, may the judgment of the RTC in the
second case be set aside?[98] Explain.
(a) I would file a motion to dismiss the said suit of the FPA on the ground of res
judicata, specifically that the second case should ve been raised as a compulsory
counter claim in the first case which is under S2R9 the claim to demolish the said
structures was a compulsory counterclaim.

b) I would not file a motion to dismiss but an answer and raise the ground for the
motion to dismiss under the pretences of failure to state a cause of action as an
affirmative defense in the answer which was stated under S6R16 I would plead in my
answer the claim for damages and removal as a compulsory counterclaim

c) Yes the judgement of the RTC may be set aside on the ground of Res judicata,
However RJ can be raised under the circumstance of being the first time to be raised
on appeal

89. P sues D who moves to dismiss for failure of the

complaint to state a cause of action. The motion is granted
and the case dismissed. The dismissal became final. Then,
D sues P on a claim arising out of the same transaction or
occurrence as P’s earlier attempted claim. P’s defense was
on the ground that D’s claim is precluded by his failure to
raise it as a counterclaim in the first action. Is P’s defense
meritorious?[99] Explain.
Yes D, Should not have filed a motion to dismiss but an answer interposing his counter
claim and raising the ground of failure to state a cause of action as an affirmative
defense under S2 R9 failure to set up a compulsory claim in the first action the same is
deemed barred

90. Fe filed a collection suit for P387,000 against Ramon in

the RTC of Davao City. Aside from alleging payment as a
defense, Ramon in his answer ser up counterclaims for
P100,000 as damages and P30,000 as attorney’s fees as a
result of the baseless filing of the complaint, as well as for
P250,000 as the balance of the purchase price of 30 units
of airconditioners he sold to Fe. (a) Suppose Ramon’s
counterclaim for the unpaid balance is P310,000, what will
happen to his counterclaims if the court dismisses the
complaint after holding a preliminary hearing on Ramon’s
affirmative defense?[100] (b) Under the same premise as
paragraph (b) above, suppose that instead of alleging
payment as a defense in his answer, Ramon filed a motion
to dismiss on that ground, at the same time setting up his
counterclaims, and the court grants his motion. What will
happen to his counterclaims?[101] Explain.
Ramon’s counterclaim may be prosecuted in the same or in a separate action under
S6R16 which stated that the said dismissal of action shall be without prejudice to the
defendant prosecuting his counter claims in the same or in a separate action

Ramon’s counter claim of 130K will be barred since it is a compulsory counter claim
which was no set up in the answer under S2R9 A counter claim cannot be set up in a
motion to dismiss

91. Petitioner filed a complaint for consolidation of title over

land sold to him by Respondent under a pacto de retro
sale. Respondent filed an answer with counterclaim asking
that Petitioner receive P810 and that the pacto de retro
sale be declared as an equitable mortgage. Petitioner did
not file an answer to the Respondent’s counterclaim. Upon
motion, the trial court declared Petitioner in default as to
Respondent’s counterclaim and rendered judgment in favor
of Respondent. Did the trial court properly declare
petitioner in default in respect of Respondent’s
counterclaim?[102] Explain.
No, the counter claim of the Respondent is compulsory since it is interjected or
connected to the subject matter of the petitioner’s complaint for consolidation. Under
the Law A party cannot be declared in default for failing to answer a compulsory
counter claim because the issues raised in the compulsory counter claim are deemed
automatically joined by the allegations of the complainant

92. Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant for recovery

of possession of real property with the Regional Trial Court
of Manila. Defendant filed an answer with affirmative
defenses and interposed a counterclaim of damages and
attorney’s fees arising from the filing of the complaint.
When plaintiff failed to file an answer on the counterclaim,
defendant moved to declare him in default.
Notwithstanding notice of the motion, plaintiff did not file
an opposition. As judge, how would you resolve the motion
to declare plaintiff in default?[103] Explain.
As Judge I would deny the motion to declare the plaintiff in default The SC has held
that a party cannot be declared in default for failing to answer a compulsory counter
claim the counter claim for damages and attorney’s fees arising from the filing of the
complaint is compulsory counter claim since it arises from the filing of the complaint
by the plaintiff hence plaintiff cannot be declared default

93. P filed against D an action for recovery of ownership

and possession of a parcel of land. D filed an answer
alleging that he was a possessor in good faith and thus had
a right of retention. D counterclaimed for reimbursement of
the value of the useful improvements he had introduced on
the land. P did not file an answer to D’s counterclaim. D
filed a motion to declare P in default as to his counterclaim.
Should the court grant D’s motion?[104] Explain.

94. L obtained a series of loans from Banco De Oro for

which he executed three REMs. L defaulted on the 3 rd loan
and BDO extrajudicially foreclosed the REM on the 1 st and
3rd loan. Two days before the scheduled public auction. L
filed with the RTC of Quezon City a complaint for specific
performances, torts, and damages against BDO for
including the 1st REM in foreclosure. BDO filed an answer
with counterclaim. BDO countered that there is a cross-
default provision in the loan contracts that justifies the
inclusion of properties in the 1st REM in the foreclosure.
BDO counterclaimed for attorney’s fees on the ground that
the suit was malicious and baseless. The auction sale
proceeded but the proceeds realized therefrom were not
sufficient to answer for L’s loan obligation. BDO sent a
demand letter to L to pay the deficiency but this was not
heeded by L. L filed a motion to admit supplemental
complaint which averred that BDO had proceeded with the
auction sale. The trial court admitted the supplemental
complaint. Subsequently, during the pendency of L’s
complaint, BDO filed with the RTC of Mandaluyong against
L a collection case for the deficiency for which L filed a
motion to dismiss on the ground that the collection case is
a compulsory counterclaim that should have been set up in
L’s complaint for tort and damages since it arose from the
same loan transaction. Should L’s motion to dismiss the
collection case be granted? [105] Explain.
No the collection case does not involve a compulsory counter claim. A compulsory
counter claim is one which must be existing at the time of filing the answer under S8
R11 An After acquired claim is merely permissive. Here the BDO's Right of action is
accrued only after L's refusal to pay after receiving demand letters of deficiency from
BDO

95. What is cross-claim?[106]

A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction
or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a
counterclaim therein. Such a cross-claim may include a claim that the party against
whom it is asserted is or may be liable to the cross-claimant for all or part of a claim
asserted in the action against the cross-claimant. (S8 R6)

96. D and E are solidarily indebted to P for P500,000. P

filed a collection case against D and E for P500,000. D filed
his answer in which he alleged that he had already paid
P500,000 to P prior to the filling of the complaint.
Judgment rendered in favor of D and E dismissing P’s
complaint, the court finding that D had already paid P even
prior to the filing of the case. The judgment became final
and executory. D then files an action to collect P250,000
from E as reimbursement. E files a motion to dismiss on
the ground that D should have filed his claim as a cross-
claim in the collection case filed by P. Should the court
grant the motion to dismiss? [107]Explain.
Yes, the court should grant the motion to dismiss. A cross-claim not set up is deemed
barred. D should have filed in the first case a cross-claim against E for reimbursement.

97. Is there such a thing as a permissive cross-claim?

[108]
Explain.
In a sense yes. A cross-claim which either matured or was acquired by a party after
serving his pleading is not compulsory. (S9R11)

98. D and E are jointly and severally indebted to P under a

promissory note for P500,000. P sues D and E before the
RTC. D filed a cross-claim against E to recover P450,000
arising from the non-payment of the price of a car sold and
delivered by D to E. E files a motion to dismiss the cross-
claim. Should the court grant the motion to dismiss?
[109]
Explain.
Yes, the court should grant the motion to dismiss. The cross-claim is not proper since
the claim by D against E did not arise out of the loan transaction subject of the
complaint. Hence the court has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the cross-claim.

99. P filed a case against D and E. D filed a cross-claim

against E. E did not answer the cross-claim. May D move to
declare E in default of the cross-claim?[110] Explain.
Yes. E should answer the cross-claim otherwise he may be declared in default of the
same. Under S3 R9 the claiming party may move for default in case of failure to
answer of the defending party. The cross-claimant is a claiming party while the cross-
defendant is a defending party within the purview of the Rules of Court
100. P filed a case against D and E. D filed a cross-claim
against E. May E in his answer to the cross-claim, assert a
counterclaim against D’s cross-claim?[111] Explain.
Yes. The cross-defendant can file an answer to the cross-claim and he may plead in the
answer a counter-claim or a cross-claim

101. D and E are solidarily indebted to P for P500,000. P

filed a collection case against D and E for P500,000. D and
E filed their answer alleging the defense of prescription.
Judgment rendered in favor of P and the same became
final and executory. D pays the P500,000 to the sheriff. D
then files an action to collect P250,000 from E. E files a
motion to dismiss on the ground that D should have filed
his claim as a cross-claim in the collection case filed by P.
should the court grant the motion to dismiss?[112] Explain.
No. The cross-claim is not compulsory but permissive since D's right to reimbursement
arose only after he had served answer. Prior to paying P, D did not yet have the right
of reimbursement as against E.

102. D borrowed P500,000 from P with X acting as the

surety. D did not pay on maturity so P sued D and X.
Judgment rendered in favor of P as against D and X for
P500,000. The bank account of X was garnished in the
amount of P500,000. X demanded indemnification from D
but the latter did not pay X. X sued D for indemnification. D
argued that X’s claim for indemnification was waived since
he did not raise it as a cross-claim pursuant to S2R9. Is D’s
argument meritorious?[113] Explain.
No. The cross-claim was merely permissive since X's right to indemnification only
arose after he had paid D. Also under S35 R39, when a judgement is upon an
obligation of one of The parties as security for another, and the surety pays the
amount or any part thereof, either by sale of his property or before sale, he may
compel re-payment from the principal.

103. S unlawfully ousted O from his parcel of land. S then

sold and delivered the land to B. O files an action for
reconveyance against S and B. Judgment was rendered in
favor of O. the judgment became final and executory. Later
on B filed an action for breach of warranty against eviction
against S. S moved to dismiss on the ground that the
action was barred since B should have raised the same as a
cross-claim against S in the reconveyance suit. Should S’s
motion to dismiss be granted?[114] Explain.
No. A cross-claim which matured or arose after the defendant has served his answer is
permissive and not mandatory. (S9 R11) Here B's cross-claim for breach of warranty
against eviction arose only after a final judgment had been rendered in the
reconveyance suit. Under the Law on Sales, the warranty against eviction cannot be
enforced until a final judgment has been rendered whereby the vendee loses the thing
acquired or a part thereof. Hence the cross-claim is not barred.

104. Is a cross-claim subject to the payment of a docket

fee?[115]Explain.
A cross-claim filed before the MTC is not subject to a docket fee but one filed with the
RTC is. (S7 (a) R141)

105. P filed a complaint for collection of a P1,000,000

loan against D and E before the RTC of Manila. D filed a
counterclaim against P for P500,000 for moral and
exemplary damages claiming that the filing of the suit was
malicious and baseless. D also filed a counterclaim against
P for P450,000 arising from the unpaid price of a car sold
by D to P. In the meantime D also filed a cross-claim
against E for indemnification contending that the loan was
really incurred for the benefit of E only. No docket fees
were paid on the counterclaims and cross-claims. (a) Is D
liable to pay docket fees on his counterclaims? [116] Explain.
(b) Is D liable to pay docket fees on his cross-claim?
[117]
Explain.
(a) D is not liable to pay docket fees on his counterclaim for P500,000 since the
counterclaim is compulsory. Collection of docket fees on compulsory counterclaims
has been suspended by the Supreme Court in its 21 September 2004 Resolution. D is
liable for the payment of docket fees on his counterclaim for P450,000 since the same
is a permissive counterclaim.

(b) D is liable to pay docket fees on his cross-claim which was filed before the RTC,
pursuant to S7 (a) R141. The SC did not suspend the collection of docket fees on cross-
claims filed with the RTC.
106. Distinguish a counterclaim from a cross-claim.[118]
As to whom directed. A counterclaim is directed against the opposing party while a
cross-claim is directed against a co-party. AS TO CONNECTION WITH THE MAIN
ACTION. A counter claim may or may not arise out of the transaction constituting the
subject matter of the opposing party's claim while a cross-claim always arises out of
the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the original action or of a
counterclaim therein. AS TO COMPULSORINESS. A counterclaim may or may not be
compulsory while a cross-claim is always compulsory. (Sec.6&7, Rule 6, ROC)

107. Define a reply.[119]

A reply is a pleading, the function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or
avoidance of new matters alleged by way of defense in the answer and thereby join or
make issue as to such new matters. (Sec.10, Rule 6, ROC)

108. Is there a need for the Plaintiff to file a reply?

[120]
Explain.
No, if a party does not file such reply, all the new matters alleged in the answer are
deemed controverted. (Sec. 10, Rule 6, ROC)

109. When is there a need for the Plaintiff to file a reply?

[121]
Explain.
When the defense is set up in the answer which is based on an actionable document
copied in or attached thereto and the plaintiff wants to contest the genuineness and
due execution of the document. The plaintiff should file a reply specifically denying
under oath the document's authenticity and due execution and setting forth what he
claims to be the facts. (Sec.8, Rule 8, ROC)

110. Assume that the suspension of the Usury Law was

lifted by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. P files a complaint
to recover a loan with interest against D. D filed an answer
in which he raised the defense that the interest rate
charged by P was usurious. Is there a need for P to file a
reply if he wants to deny the allegations of usury?
[122]
Explain.
Yes. The plaintiff has to file a reply under oath if he desires to deny specifically the
genuineness and due execution of the actionable document, and avoid an admission
of such matters. (Sec. 7, Rule 8, ROC)
111. May the Plaintiff set up in his reply claims arising
from the new matters set up by way of defense in the
answer?[123] Explain.
No, the plaintiff should set forth such new claims in an amended or supplemental
complaint.

112. What is a third-party complaint?[124]

A third-party complaint is a claim that the defendant may file against a person not a
party to the action for contribution, indemnification, subrogation or any other relief, in
respect of his opponent's claim.

113. What is a fourth-party complaint?[125]

A fourth-party complaint is a claim that the third-party defendant may file against a
person not a party to the action for contribution, indemnification, subrogation or any
other relief, in respect of his opponent's claim.

114. Distinguish a third-party complaint from a third-

party claim.[126]
AS TO ITS NATURE. A third-party complaint is a pleading while a third-party claim is
not a pleading but an affidavit or paper.

AS TO WHO FILES. A third-party complaint is filed by a party to a case while a third-

party claim is files by a stranger to the case.

AS TO PURPOSE. The purpose of a third-party complaint is for the defendant to bring

in a stranger as a party to the case while the purpose of the third-party claim is for the
third-party to notify the sheriff of his right or claim over the property attached, levied,
or seized by the sheriff.

115. Illustrate each of the grounds for a third-party

complaint.[127]

116. Rufino is indebted to Simplicio in the amount of

P400,000 payable on 31 December 2007. To meet the
obligation, Rufino saved P200,000 by January 2007. During
that month, Rosendo was able to borrow the P200,000
from Rufino after having been warned that Rosendo should
return the P200,000 to Rufino before 31 December 2007.
In February 2008, Simplicio sued Rufino for the collection
of his credit. Rufino pleaded in his answer that he was
ready to pay P200,000 to Simplicio and, reciting his
transaction with Rosendo, he filed a third-party complaint
against Rosendo for the recovery of the P200,000. Is the
third-party admissible? (80 Bar Q2 ed).[128]

117. B and C borrowedP900,000 from A. The promissory

note was executed by B and C in a joint and several
capacity. B, who received the money from A, gave C
P450,000. C in turn loaned P225,000 out of the P450,000
he received to D. In an action filed by A against B and C
with the RTC of Quezon City, cab C file a third-party
complaint against D for the amount of P225,000? (97 Bar
Q2b ed).[129]

118. D borrowed P500,000 from P with X acting as the

surety. D did not pay on maturity so P sued X. Judgment
rendered in favor of P as against X for P500,000. The bank
account of X was garnished in the amount of P500,000. X
demanded indemnification from D but the latter did not pay
so X filed a suit seeking indemnification from D. D filed a
motion to dismiss arguing that X should have filed a third-
party complaint against D and not having done so, the
action for indemnification is barred by res judicata or
waiver. Should the motion to dismiss be granted?[130]

119. D and E are solidarily indebted to P for P500,000.

The debt is due and outstanding. P sues D for the P500,000
before the RTC. D filed a motion for leave to file a third-
party complaint against E seeking contribution of
P250,000. Should the court grant the motion even though
the amount of the claim does not exceed P300,000? [131]

120. In an action brought by PCIB against RM and XY

before the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila, XY interposed
a counterclaim of P450,000; a cross-claim against RM for
P500,000; and a third-party complaint against DE for
P425,000, all of which were dismissed, upon proper
motions, for lack of jurisdiction. Discuss the merits of the
said order of dismissal.[132]

121. P filed a complaint against the surety with the RTC

of Manila. The surety then filed a third-party complaint
against X, who had executed indemnity agreement
undertaking to indemnify the surety in case it becomes
liable under the surety bond. X filed a motion to dismiss
the third-party complaint on the ground of improper venue,
X pointed out that the indemnity agreement between the
surety and X contains a provision that any suit arising from
the agreement shall be solely and exclusively filed in
Quezon City. Should the court dismiss the third-party
complaint?[133]

122. P filed an action to recover on his insurance claim

against insurer D. D filed a third-party complaint against
re-insurer E which was allowed by the trial court. Judgment
was rendered in favor of P in respect of his complaints
against D, and in favor of D on its third-party complaint
against E. Only D appealed from the judgment against it.
May D move for the execution of the judgment on the
third-party complaint against E?[134]

123. P filed a case against D. D filed a motion for leave of

court to file a third-party complaint against E. The court
dismissed the third-party complaint. May D appeal from the
order?[135]

124. X’s car collided with P’s car destroying the latter’s
car. P sues the insurer to recover the damages in his car
insurance policy. The insurer files a third-party complaint
against X. May X in his answer to the third-party complaint
raise the defense that P’s car was at the time of the
collision being driven by P’s friend who did not have a valid
driver’s license, thus violating the authorized-driver clause
of the car policy and barring P from recovering thereon? [136]
Yes. Under S13 R6, a third party defendant may allege in his answer defenses that the
third party plaintiff may have against the original plaintiffs claim. The violation of the
authorized-driver clause is a defenses that the insurer may have against the claim of
the insured P, yet this may be invoked by X in order to defeat or negate the insurer’s
claim pursuant to S13 R6.

125. P filed a collection case against D who acted as a

surety in a loan extended by P to x. D in turn filed a third-
party complaint against X for indemnification. It turned out
that X had already paid his loan to P even before P had
brought his suit. May X file a counterclaim against P for
moral and exemplary damages for bringing malicious and
unfounded suit and causing X to be dragged into court? [137]
Yes. Ordinarily a third party defendant may not file a counterclaim against the original
plaintiff, since the original plaintiff is not an opposing party as to him. However under
S13 R6, the third party defendant, in proper cases, may assert a counterclaim against
the original plaintiff in respect of the latter’s claim against the third party plaintiff.
Here X’s counterclaim is connected to the loan transaction subject of the suit filed by P
against D.

126. What is the rule in the event that there is a need to

bring in new parties?[138] Explain.

127. What are the parts of a pleading?[139]

Parts of the pleading are the ff:

Caption – sets the name of the court, title of the action and docket number if assigned
Body – the body sets the designation, allegations of the party’s claim or defenses,
relief prayed for and the date of pleading.
Signature and address - it includes matters stated in answer to the next question.

128. What matters or information should be stated by

counsel below his signature? (PIRMA)[140]
P – PTR OFFICIAL RECEIPT NO. FOR THE CURRENT YR.
I - IBP OFFICIAL RECEIOT NO. FOR THE CURRENT YR
R - his roll number
M - No. and Date of issue of his MCLE Cert of Compliance or Cert. of exemption for the
immediately proceeding yr
A – His address which should not be a post – office box
129. What is the effect if the counsel fails to state any of
the said information below his signature?[141]
The pleading is considered as not having been signed. Failure to comply with the B.M.
No. 1922 would cause the dismissal of the case and the expunction of the pleadings in
the record.

130. Give the rules regarding the inclusion of the parties’

names in the pleadings.[142]
RULES OF PLEADING: THE names of all parties shall be included in the original
complaint. In subsequent pleadings, it is sufficient to indicate that there are other
parties by putting “et al” after first party in each sides. Names of all parties in an
appeal shall also be indicated in the notice of appeal and records of appeal. (S5 & 6
R41)

In a class suit, it is sufficient if the names of those appearing in the complaints as

plaintiffs or defendants in an answer, be sufficiently numerous and representative as
to fully protect the interest of all concern. (S12 R3)

Identity or name of a defendant is unknown, he may be sued as the unknown owner,

heir, devisee or any other designation as the case may require. When the true identity
is revealed / discovered, the pleading may be amended accordingly. (S14 R3)

When two or more persons were not organized as an entity with juridical personality
enter into transaction, they may be sued under the name by which they are generally
or commonly known. In answer of such defendant, names and address of the persons
composing said entity must be revealed. (s15 R3)

131. May a court adjudge a defendant liable for

P1,000,000 where the specific amount prayed for in the
complaint is only P800,000 and there is no general prayer
for such further or other relief as may be deemed just or
equitable?[143]
YES, provided the evidence warrants and the defendants fails to object to the
introduction of evidence on the additional amount of 200,000.00. In such a case the
plaintiff shall pay the additional filing fee on the 200,000, which shall constitute a lien
on the judgment award. (S2R 141)

However, if defendants objects to such evidence, the court may nonetheless still
admit the evidence of the presentation of the merits of the action, and the ends of
substantial justice will be subserved thereby. The complaint shall be ordered
amended. (S5R10)
132. May the court in its final judgment award a claim
not alleged, or a relief different from, or more that that
claimed in the pleading?[144]
YES, (S2R141), the evidence on record should so warrant and the provisions of S5R10
should be taken into account. The docket fees on such award shall constitute a lien on
the judgment. (S2R141)

133. What is the rule regarding the signing of pleadings?

[145]

Every pleading must be signed by the party or counsel representing him, stating either
case his address which should not be a post office box. (S3 R7)

134. The OSG in behalf of the Republic filed a complaint

in the RTC foe the revocation of titles registered in the
name of Kenrick Development Corporation (KDC). KDC
filed an answer which was purportedly signed by its
counsel, Atty. G. the trials of the case was held up by
various pre-trial and discovery issues. Two years later,
Atty. G who was no longer KDC’s counsel, was summoned
in a congressional hearing on fake land titles. He testified
that he prepared KDC’s answer and sent an unsigned draft
to KDC’s president. He testified that the signature
appearing above his name in the answer was not his, that
he did not authorize any one to sign in his behalf, and he
did not know signed above his name. The Republic filed a
motion to declare KDC in default for failure to file a valid
answer. The RTC granted the motion, declared KDC in
default, and allowed the Republic to present its evidence ex
parte. On appeal, the CA reversed the RTC, saying that
Atty. G assented to the filing of the answer in his behalf as
never disowned the answer and resumed acting as counsel
for KDC after its filing. Did the CA err?[146] explain
Yes. (S3 Rul 7) is quite clear when it requires that a pleading must be signed by the
party or counsel representing him. Hence, only the signature of either the party
himself or his counsel operates to validly convert a pleading from one that is unsigned
to one that is unsigned. The answer being unsigned, it produced no legal effect and
thus KDC was properly declared in default.
135. What is the significance of counsel’s signature on a
pleading?[147]
The signature of counsel constitutes a certification by him that; 1. He has read the
pleading; 2. To the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground
to support it; and, 3. It is not interposed for delay

136. Is it required that a pleading be under oath, verified

or accompanied by affidavit?[148]
No. Pleadings need not be under oath, verified or accompanied by affidavit, except
when otherwise specifically required by law or rule. (S4R7)

137. In an original complaint for recovery of possession

of common property, the heading of the complaint states:
“Heirs of Mariano, Namely: Jose et. Al vs. Heirs of Ramon,
et, al.,” do you the caption was properly prepared?
[149]
Explain.
No. The heirs must be named thereat. The names of all the parties should be included
in the original complaint. In subsequent pleadings it is sufficient if the name of the first
party on each side be stated with an appropriate indication when there are other
parties , such as by using the word “et, al” The names of all the parties in an appeal
shall also be indicated in the notice of appeal and record of appeal S5&6 R41.

138. D lost in the decision of the MTC. His counsel

seasonably filed a notice of appeal but failed to sign the
same. What is the effect of the notice of appeal?
[150]
Explain.
The unsigned pleading is invalid and it produces no legal effect. Where a Notice of
Appeal is not signed, it would be as if the hearing never took place. This is so since one
cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stand, (UAC v. Mcfoy, 1962)

139. Based on the preceding problem, will the court be

liable if it allows the counsel to sign the notice of appeal
without first notifying the opposing counsel?[151] Explain.

140. How a pleading is verified?[152]

A pleading is verified by an affidavit that the affiant has read the pleading and that the
allegations therein are true and correct of his personal knowledge or based on
authentic records.
141. May a counsel verify his client’s pleading?
[153]
Explain.
Yes. If the facts in the pleading are true and correct of his personal knowledge or
based on authentic records. (S3 R7). Where the verification is made by the lawyer who
also signed the pleadings, the courts are inclined to be liberal to accept such signature
by the lawyer as substantial evidence (G. R. No. 141947, July 5, 2001 Santos Vs. Court
of Appeals.

142. What would be the effect if the pleading required to

be verified is not verified or lacks a proper verification? [154]

143. What pleadings or papers are required to be

verified?[155]

144. What is forum shopping?[156]

145. Why is forum shopping prohibited?[157] Explain.

146. What is the test for determining whether a party

violates the rule against forum shopping?[158] Explain.

147. P filed a complaint against D for collection of sum of

money. No certification against forum shopping was
contained or annexed to the complaint. D filed a motion to
dismiss the complaint on the ground of failure to comply
with S4R7. P filed an amended complaint to which he now
annexed the certification against forum shopping. Should
D’s motion to dismiss be granted?[159] Explain.

148. If P’s complaint is dismissed, what is the remedy or

recourse available to P?[160] Explain.

149. P filed a complaint for quasi-delict against D before

the MeTC. The Metc dismissed the complaint on the ground
of forum-shopping since there was a pending criminal case
for reckless imprudence involving the same accident
against D. P filed a motion for reconsideration which was
denied by the MeTC. On the 60 th day from the notice of the
order denying his motion for reconsideration, P filed a
special civil action for certiorari with the RTC seeking to set
aside the dismissal. The RTC dismissed the petition for
certiorari on the ground that appeal was proper remedy.
Was the RTC’s dismissal order correct?[161]

150. P filed a complaint against D for collection of sum of

money. A certification against forum shopping was annexed
to the complaint but the certification did not contain an
undertaking on the part of D. D filed a motion to dismiss
the complaint on the ground of failure to comply with S5
R7. P filed an amended complaint to which is now annexed
the certification against forum shopping containing the
missing allegation. Should D’s motion to dismiss be
granted?[162]

151. Petitioners are husband and wife. They filed a

petition for certiorari and mandamus before the Court of
Appeals but only the husband signed the CFS. Is the
husband’s signature sufficient?[163] Explain.
Yes, the husband’s signature alone is sufficient in compliance with rule on Certification
against Forum Shopping (Sps.Dar Alonzo-Legasto,30 Aug 2000).

152. May counsel for a party sign the CFS?[164]

As a general rule No. CFS needs to be signed by the party himself since he is in the
best position to state the matters therein. Exception would be the case wherein the
party is a juridical person in which case the lawyer could sign. The lawyer must
however be specially authorized by a board resolution. (BPI Leasing Corp v.CA,18
November 2003).

153. RC filed a complaint for the annulment of foreclosed

sale against Bank V. In its answer, Bank V set up a
counterclaim for actual damages and litigation expenses.
RC filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim on the
ground that Bank V’s answer with counterclaim was not
accompanied by a certification against forum shopping.
Rule on the issue. [165] Explain.
I would rule for the denial of the motion to dismiss. The Supreme Court has held that a
certification against forum shopping is not required for asserting a compulsory
counterclaim since it is not an initiatory pleading or incipient application but merely
auxiliary to the main preceding. ( Sps. Carpio v. Rural Bank of Sto.Tomas , G.R. 153171,
4 May 2006. Hence the counterclaim is for actual damages and litigation expenses and
thus compulsory since it arose out of the transaction or occurrence which is the
subject matter of RC’s complaint. Hence the motion to dismiss should be denied.

154. The NLRC rendered a decision against Fr. Tabora,

the Ateneo de Naga University, and Edwin Bernal (the
petitioners). The Petitioners filed a petition under Rule 65
seeking the reversal of the NLRC decision. The verification
and the certification against forum shopping (CFS) was
however signed only by Fr. Tabora. The CA dismissed the
Petition insofar as the Ateneo and Bernal were concerned,
notwithstanding a belated showing that Fr. Tabora has
been authorized to sign the verification and CFS for Ateneo
and Bernal. Was the dismissal proper?[166] Explain.
No. In verification, the signature of one instead of all the parties would be sufficient if
there is showing that he had sufficient knowledge and belief to sign the verification. As
regards the CFS requirement, there was substantial compliance with the submission,
albeit delayed, of proof that Fr. Tabora had been authorized to sign the CFS for the
Ateneo and Bernal. The SC considered the delay a mere technicality or procedural
imperfection which should not defeat the ends of justice. (Ateneo de Naga University
v. Manalo,9 May 05). Doctrine reiterated in China Banking Corporation v. Mondragon
International Phils, 17 Nov.05, re belated proof of authority of corporate signatory to
CFS. Recent trend of liberality .

155. The verification and certification against forum

shopping appended to the appeal to the NLRC were signed
by BPI’s Assistant Vice-President. There was no proof
however that the AVP was authorized by the corporation’s
board. Are the verification and the certification against
forum shopping fatally defective?[167] Explain.
The AVP as a corporate officer has implied or apparent authority to sign the
verification and CFS. An express authorization is not an indispensable requirement.
The fact that BPI acquiesced and expressed no obligation to the appeal by before the
NLRC is proof that it authorized the AVP to sign the verification and the CFS. (Enriquez
v. BPI, G.R. 172812, 12 February 2008)
156. Who are corporate officers or employees who may
sign the verification and certification against forum
shopping without need of board resolution?[168] Explain.
Corporate officers or employees who may sign the verification and certification against
forum shopping are : (1) Chairperson of the board of directors; ( 2) the President ; (3)
General Manager ; (4) Personnel Officer; and (5) Employment Specialist in a labor
case. The rationale for this list is that these officers are in position to verify the truth
and correctness of the allegations in the complaint of petition. (Cagayan Valley Drug
Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 151413, 13 February 2008). The
Vice President and Assistant Vice- President may be added to the list. (Enriquez v. BPI,
G.R. No.172812, 12 February 2008).

157. Korean Airlines (KAL), a foreign corporation licensed

to do business in the Philippines filed a collection case
against Expert Travel and Tours Inc. The verification and
CFS was signed by its counsel and resident agent X. To the
motion to dismiss filed by ETI, KAL countered that X was
authorized by KAL in a teleconference by the Board of
Directors. No record such authorization was attached to the
complaint. Can the resident agent sign the verification and
CFS in behalf of a foreign corporation?[169] Explain.
No. X was not specifically authorized to execute the certification in behalf of KAL.
Being a resident agent does not mean that he is authorized to execute the requisite
CFS because while he may be aware of actions filed against his principal, he may be
aware of actions initiated by his principal whether in the Philippines or in the country
where such foreign corp. is organized.( Expertravel and Tours Inc.CA,26 May 2005)

158. In the proceedings for the settlement of the testate

estate of Alice, a contingent money claim for commission in
the event of the sale of properties of the estate was filed
by Alan with the probate court, The executrix moved for
the dismissal of the claim on the ground that no
certification against forum shopping was attached thereto
pursuant to S5 R7. The RTC dismissed the money claim.
Was the dismissal proper?[170]Explain.
No. A certification against forum shopping is required only for claimants and other
initiatory pleadings. A money claim against the estate is not an initiatory pleading
since the probate proceeding was already initiated upon the filing of the petition for
the allowance of the decedent’s will. A money claim does not initiate new litigation
but merely brings a material but incidental matter arising in the progress of the case.
Hence a money claim is only incidental to the probate proceeding, more so if it is
contingent since the claimant cannot even institute a separate action for a mere
contingent claim. ( Sheker v. Estate of Sheker, G.R..157912,13 December 2007)

159. What will be the effect on the part of the plaintiff if

he submitted a false certification against forum shopping?
[171]
Explain.
The submission of a false certification or non-compliance with any of the undertakings
therein shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without prejudice to the
corresponding administrative and criminal actions. 160.

If the acts of the party and his counsel clearly constitute wilful and deliberate forum
shopping, the same shall be ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and shall
constitute direct contempt as well as cause for administrative sanctions.

160. What is the effect of the action if the plaintiff

deliberately committed forum shopping?[172] Explain.
If the acts of the party and his counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum
shopping, the same shall be ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and shall
constitute direct contempt as well as cause for administrative sanctions.

161. What are ultimate facts?[173] Explain.

Ultimate facts are facts essential to a claim or defense. It cannot be stricken out
without leaving the statement of the cause of action or the defense insufficient.

162. How shall the ultimate facts be stated in a pleading?

[174]
Explain.
The ultimate facts shall be stated in a plain , concise and direct manner and in a
methodological and logical form.

163. How may alternative causes of action or defenses be

pleaded?[175]Explain.
A party may set forth two or more statements of a claim or defense alternatively or
hypothetically, either in one cause of action or defense or in separate causes of action
or defenses.
164. In alternative causes of action or defense, what is
the effect of the insufficiency of one of the alternatives?
[176]
Explain.
In such a case, as long as one of the alternative statements, if made independently,
would be sufficient, the pleading is not rendered insufficient by the insufficiency of the
alternative.

165. In pleading alternative causes of action or defenses,

is it required that the causes of action or defenses be
consistent with each other?[177]Explain.
No, the causes of actions or defense alleged may be inconsistent with each other,
provided that each cause of action or defense be consistent in itself

166. Is a general averment of the performance or

occurrence of all conditions precedent in a pleading be
sufficient?[178] Explain.
Yes, in any pleading a general averment of the performance or occurerence of all
conditions precedent shall be sufficient.

167. Odrareg filed a complaint for recovery of possession

of land against Onitnelot. He alleged
that barangay conciliation took place prior to the filing of
the action. He did not, however, attach the certificate to
file action. Will the case be dismissible for failure to comply
with a condition precedent?[179] Explain

168. In an action to recover a parcel of land, the

intervenors claimed to be the absolute owners thereof and
asked that they be placed in possession of the property,
but defendants maintained that they had absolute title on
the land and filed a counterclaim for injunction against
plaintiffs and intervenors. Judgment was rendered for the
defendants. In a subsequent action, the intervenors
claimed from the defendants the expenses they had
incurred in clearing and cultivating the parcel of land and
planting coconut and other fruit-bearing trees thereon. The
defendants in their answer pleaded that the plaintiff’s claim
was a compulsory counterclaim that should have been set
up in the former action as against the counterclaim for
injunction filed by the defendants. The plaintiffs replied
that they could not have set up in the former case such as
counterclaim for improvements because it would have been
inconsistent with and would have weakened their claim for
title to the land. Is the plaintiff’s contention
[180]
meritorious? Explain.

169. P filed with the CFI of Cebu an action for recovery of

land against R. R filed an answer raising the defense of
ownership. The CFI decided in favor of R but on appeal the
CA reversed the CFI. CA ordered R to vacate to vacate the
premises. In the body of the decision, the CA stated that
there was no fraud or bad faith on the part of R. The CA’s
decision became final and executory. P moved for the
execution of the judgment before the CFI. R opposed on
the ground that a hearing supplementary to execution
should be conducted to allow them to present evidence to
prove that they are builders in good faith and to prove the
value of the improvements. P argued that R should have
set up their claim for reimbursement in the action for
recovery. The CA allowed R to present such evidence,
stating that R could not have presented such evidence in
the trial court since it would be inconsistent with their
defense of ownership. (a) Is the reason cited by the CA for
allowing R to present evidence tenable?[181] Explain. (b)
Should the CFI grant the opposition of R to P’s motion for
execution?[182] Explain. (c) May R file a separate action to
recover the value of the improvements introduced by
them?[183] Explain.

170. What facts may be averred generally in a pleading?

[184]

171. What facts must be alleged with particularity?[185]

172. The complaint alleged that the defendant acted in

bad faith, arbitrarily, illegally, wrongfully, and in violation
of law. However, it did not contain any averment of facts
showing that defendant’s acts were done in the manner
alleged. Does the complaint state a cause of action?
[186]
Explain.

173. What is an actionable document?[187]

174. Give examples of actionable documents?[188]

175. What is the requirement regarding an actionable

document?[189]

176. What are the two ways of setting forth an actionable

document?[190]

177. If the adverse party wants to contest the

genuineness and due execution of an actionable document,
how shall he do so?[191] Explain.

178. What specific facts are deemed included within the

admission by the adverse party of the genuineness and due
execution of an actionable document?[192]
Specific facts are:

1- That the party whose signature it bears signed it

2- That signed by another, it was signed for the adverse party and with his authority
3- That at the time it was signed, it was in words and figures exactly as set out in the
pleading of the party relying upon it
4- that the document was duly delivered
5- That any formal requisites of law, such as seal acknowledgement or revenue stamp
which it lacks are waived by him

179. P purportedly sold a parcel of land to D. Later, P

claimed that what he signed was a document captioned
lease contract and not a deed of sale. P then filed a
complaint against D and M, to whom D sold the property.
In their answer, D and M attached the purported deed of
sale. P did not specifically deny under oath the deed of
sale. Can P be allowed to assail the validity of the deed of
sale when he failed to deny it under oath the genuineness
and due execution thereof?[193] Explain.
Yes, failure to deny the genuineness and due execution of an actionable document
does not preclude a party from arguing against it by evidence of fraud, mistake,
compromise, payment, statute of limitations, estoppel and want of consideration.

180. P filed an action to recover a parcel of land against

D. attached to the complaint is a copy of the deed of sale
executed by D’s father in favor of P. D specifically denied
but not under oath the deed of sale. At the trial of the
case, D sought to present an expert witness to testify that
the signature of the seller in the deed of sale is a forgery. P
objected to the presentation of the witness saying that D
impliedly admitted the genuineness and due execution of
the deed of sale when he failed to specifically deny it under
oath. How should the trial court rule on the objection?
[194]
Explain.
The trial court should overrule the objection. Under S8 R8 the requirement of an oath
does not apply when the adverse party does not appear to be a party to the
instrument. Here the D's were not parties to the deed of sale.

181. P filed a verified complaint against D seeking to

recover a parcel of land. In the complaint, P alleged that he
never sold the land to D but D took possession under false
claim of ownership. D filed and answer to which he
attached a copy of the deed of sale between him and P
over the land. P did not specifically deny under oath the
genuineness and due execution of the deed of sale. Was
there an implied admission under S8R8?[195] Explain.
No. The verified complaint with a specific allegations that P never sold the land to D
was a substantial traversal of the actionable document.

182. M filed a verified complaint to annul a deed of sale

over community property which his wife N had executed in
favor of T. M alleged that the sale was made without his
consent and knowledge. In T’s answer, he attached a SPA
purportedly executed by M in favor of N. M filed a reply
which was not under oath alleging his signature to the SPA
was forged. May M prove that his signature to the SPA was
forged?[196] Explain.
Yes the allegation in the verified complaint that M did not know or consent to the sale
of the land put T on adequate notice that it would be called upon during the trial to
prove the genuineness and due execution of the SPA.

183. P filed a complaint for collection of P500,000 against

D. P attached a copy of the promissory note for P500,000
to the complaint. D filed an answer which was not under
oath or verified, in which he alleged in the main that he
had already paid the P500,000. P without accounting for
the non-production of the original. D objected to the offer
on the ground that it violates the best evidence rule since
only a copy and not the original was presented. Should the
trial court sustain the objection?[197] Explain.
No the trial court should not sustain the objection. The Supreme Court has held in
Gaw vs.Chua that a party who impliedly admits the genuineness and due execution of
a document by failing to consent it in accordance with S8 R8 cannot object to the
presentation of a copy thereof rather the original.

184. P and R are the children of the late CC. Upon the
demise of CC, his spouse and his children executed a deed
of partition wherein they waived their shares over the H
Lumber in favor of their co-heir Q. Q then sold the H
Lumber to R. Later R delivered a check for P200,000 to P
which the latter encashed. Subsequently R sued P to collect
on the P200,000 which R alleges was a loan. In her answer
with counterclaim, P alleged that the P200,000 was an
advance on her share in H Lumber and counterclaimed for
accounting and delivery of her share. R filed an answer to
the counterclaim wherein he alleged that P no longer had
any interest in H Lumber because of the execution of the
deed of partition and that he is now the owner of the H
Lumber by virtue of a deed of sale executed in his favor by
CC. R annexed copies of the deed of partition and of sale to
his answer to the counterclaim. P filed a reply and
countered that the deed of partition and the deed of sale
were not true and valid agreements and did not express
the true intention of the parties, and that the deeds were
only temporary paper arrangements executed upon advice
of counsel until all the heirs could reach a final agreement.
The trial court ruled in favor of R. P contended that it was
error for the trial court to admit mere copies of the deed of
partition and the deed of sale in violation of the best
evidence rule. Is P’s contention correct?[198] Explain.
No the petitioner's contention is not correct. The Supreme Court has held in Gaw vs.
Chua Gr No.160855, that production of the original may be dispensed with in the trial
courts discretion whether the opponent does not bona fide dispute the contents of
the documents and no other useful purpose will be served by requiring production.

Here there was no dispute as to the terms of either deed; hence the RTC correctly
admitted the photocopies in evidence. Petitioner admitted signing the deed of
partition.as for the deed of sale, petitioner in effect admitted the genuineness and due
execution of the deed of sale when she failed to specifically deny it pursuant to S8 R8.
The petitioner did not contest the contents of the deed but simply alleged that there
was a contemporaneous agreement that the transfer of hagonoy lumber to Chua Sioc
Juan was only temporary.

185. S filed and action for collection against F. In its

complaint S alleged that F applied with S for the issuance
of letters of credit to finance the purchase of raw materials
from various suppliers and that S issued the letters of
credit but F did not pay the loan it had incurred from S in
relation to the letters of credit. The letters of credit were
attached to the complaint. F filed an answer not under oath
denying liability. Judgment was rendered in favor of S. F
contends that the trial court erred in admitting in evidence
the letters of credit since the documentary stamps were
not affixed thereto and cancelled hence the letter of credit
cannot be used in evidence pursuant to Section 201 of the
National Internal Revenue Code. Is F correct? [199] Explain.
No since F failed to specifically deny under oath the letters of credit, it is deemed to
have impliedly admitted the genuineness and due execution of the same. Such implied
admission includes the waiver of the objection to the lack of documentary stamps.

186. P filed an action to annul a deed of sale against D on

the ground that he had not made any sale thereof. D filed
an answer to which he attached a copy of a deed of sale
purportedly executed by P. P did not file a reply under
oath. During trial, P presented without objection an expert
witness who testified that P’s signature on the deed of sale
was forged. May the court take into account the testimony
of the expert witness in deciding the case?[200] Explain.

187. What are the three modes of specific denial? [201]

188. Oicnanev filed a complaint for recovery of the 5%

usurious interest he paid to Olifnap, in addition to the
principal obligation. Olifnap filed his answer without
denying specifically the the usurious interest. What is the
effect of the denial of Olifnap?[202] Explain.

189. On the basis of an alleged promissory note executed

by Harold in favor of Ramon, the latter filed a complaint for
P950,000.00 against the former in the RTC of Davao City.
In an unverified answer, Harold specifically denied the
genuineness of the promissory note. During the trial,
Harold sought to offer the testimonies of the following: (1)
the testimony of an NBI handwriting expert to prove the
forgery of his signature;[203] and (2) the testimony of a
credible witness to prove that if ever Harold had executed
the note in favor of Ramon, the same was not supported by
a consideration. May Ramon validly object to the proposed
testimonies?[204] Give a brief explanation of your answer.

190. What is the effect if a material averment in the

complaint is not specifically denied?[205] Explain.

191. C filed a complaint for sum of money against Y. A

copy of the promissory note upon which the action was
based was attached to the complaint. The complaint alleges
that Y defaulted in the payment of the note. Y filed an
answer in which he admits the paragraph regarding his
personal circumstances but “specifically denies” the rest of
the allegations for want of knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth thereof. C moved
for a judgment on the pleadings in his favor. Should the
trial court grant the motion?[206] Explain.
192. What is a negative pregnant?[207]

193. What is the effect of a negative pregnant?[208]

194. Give examples of negative pregnant.[209]

195. G filed a case against N for recovery of possession

of and to quiet title over a parcel of land. P in paragraph 4
of the complaint alleges that P was unable to take
possession due to unwarranted adverse claim of ownership
and possession by D alleging sale by certain FN of subject
property to D. In paragraph 3 of his answer, D alleged
thus: “Defendant specifically denies paragraph 4 of the
complaint, the truth being that defendant never asserted
title of ownership to the property in virtue of any deed of
conveyance executed in favor of defendant FN nor claimed
any possessory right.” P moved for judgment on the
pleadings. Should the court grant P’s motion?[210] Explain.