Atty. Robert Aldrin B. Ortiz: Mr. Jose Abusado

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B.
ORTIZ
Law and Notarial Services No. 2-23rd Street, East Bajac-Bajac, Olongapo City 2200 Phils.
Mobile No. 09355312300; Email: robert.aldrin.ortiz@alumni.ateneo.edu
04 April 2013 MR. JOSE ABUSADO 23 Katipunan Ave., Quezon City
LETTER WRITING ITEM No. 1
Dear Mr. Abusado, My client, Mrs. Naty Ferrer, owner of a row of apartments in Quezon City, had referred the matter of instituting the proper complaint for ejectment against you for your failure to pay your monthly rentals in the amount of P18,000.00 or a total amount of P1,224,000.00 since August 2007 up to present. Clause 10(a) of the contract states that the deposit shall only be refunded one month from the expiration or termination of the contract of lease, after the lessor shall have ascertained that all the utility bills chargeable to the tenant have been settled as evidenced by receipts. In view thereof, demand is hereby made that you vacate the premises you are presently occupying together with all persons claiming rights under you, and to pay your rentals-inarrears in the total amount of P1,224,000.00 within ten (10) days upon receipt of this letter. If you failed to vacate the leased premises and pay the aforementioned amount, I will be constrained to file the necessary action in court in order to protect the interest of my client. I hope that you will give this matter your most preferential attention in order to be spared of expensive, embarrassing and time-consuming litigation. Thank you very much.
Very truly yours,
ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ Counsel of Mrs. Naty Ferrer
ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

04 April 2013 QRS Corporation, Inc. c/o Atty. Mario Laginggalit 28/F The World Centre, 330 Sen. Gil Puyat Ave., Makati City To the Managing Directors of QRS Corporations, Inc.,
LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 2-A
I am writing as the new retainer counsel of my client, Mr. Joseph Ramos, in regard to the unsettled payment of QRS Corporation, Inc.s building construction contract with my client. The said contract is already 95% to its completion. In view thereof, demand is hereby made that the corporation is requested to settle the said outstanding obligation amounting to P2,500,000.00 within fifteen (15) days upon receipt of this letter. If you failed to pay the aforementioned obligation, I will be constrained to file the necessary action in court in order to protect the interest of my client. I hope that you will give this matter your most preferential attention in order to be spared of expensive, embarrassing and time-consuming litigation. Thank you very much.
Very truly yours, ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ Counsel of Mr. Joseph Ramos

10 April 2013 QRS Corporation, Inc. c/o Atty. Mario Laginggalit 28/F The World Centre, 330 Sen. Gil Puyat Ave., Makati City
LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 2-B
To the Managing Directors of QRS Corporations, Inc., Reference is hereby made to your counter-proposal asking for a 30-day extension, payment of P700,000.00 and proposal to pay the balance in 36 equal monthly installments. My client, however, finds your counter-proposal inacceptable and hereby demands payment of the full amount of P2,500,000.00 within sixty (60) days upon receipt of this letter. Please consider this as our last and final demand. Thank you very much.
Very truly yours, ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ Counsel of Mr. Joseph Ramos
ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ TAN SY CO & ASSOCIATES

Law andLaw Notarial Firm Services rd No. 2-23 Street, East Bajac-Bajac, Olongapo City1227, 2200 Phils. 6/F Pacific Star Building Makati Ave., Makati City
Mobile No. 09355312300; Email: robert.aldrin.ortiz@alumni.ateneo.edu Tel: (987) 654-3210; Email: tansyco-a@tsclawphil.com
04 April 2013 MS. MONINA A. RIVERO Lot 80 Blk. 1 Waterdam Rd. Gordon Heights, Olongapo City
LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 3
Dear Ms. Rivero, My client, World Cellphone, Inc. the primary cellular phone service provider in the Philippines, would like to remind you of your unsettled account for four (4) months amounting to P3,850.60. Please settle your balance at any World Cellphone Inc. stores or other accredited payment facility immediately to avoid suspension of our service. Please also be advised that applicable termination fees may apply if your account is suspended. If by chance, payment has been made prior receipt of this letter, please disregard this reminder and accept our thanks. Thank you very much.
Very truly yours, ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ Counsel for World Cellphone, Inc.

04 April 2013 MS. LUCY TENG 1612-A Crisostomo St. Sampaloc, Manila
Dear Ms. Teng, I would like to apologize that I cannot possibly represent you in your case based on your narration of facts before me. As your legal counsel and upon studying the merits of the case, your best course of action is to settle the matter with the victims families and pay what they are asking for; or, at the very least, enter into negotiations to arrive at a settlement in order to be spared of expensive, embarrassing and time-consuming litigation. I would highly advise that you consider my aforementioned opinion which would be most beneficial to your interest. Thank you very much.
Very truly yours, ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

04 April 2013
ZEETEEDEE Corporation c/o Atty. Cezar T. Azar Azar & Azar Law Firm 10/F Pacific Star Building, Emerald Ave., Pasig City
To the Managing Directors of Zeeteedee Corporation, I am writing as the legal counsel of my client, Mr. Conrado V. Soliven, regarding his failure to pay the total amount of P145,000.00. Reference is hereby made to your final demand letter received by my client. In lieu of the foregoing, my client is seeking for your consideration to accept his L300 delivery van in payment of his obligation due to my clients inability to settle the amount in full. Please do consider my clients counter-offer. Your utmost and kind understanding regarding this matter is highly appreciated Thank you very much.
Very truly yours, ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ Counsel of Mr. Conrado V. Soliven

04 April 2013 MR. JOHNNY MATUMAL 13 Drapper St. West Tapinac, Olongapo City, Zambales Dear Mr. Matumal,
This letter is in response to your narration of facts before me about your failed marriage with Aunt Marsha. For convenience, I took the liberty to include a subject title for each of my response.
Executing a Written Document: Assuming that the marriage is valid and both party is a citizen of the Philippines, you and Aunt Marsha cannot simply execute a written document allowing each other to live separate lives and marry someone else if they wish for it is not in accordance with the Family Code of the Philippines. Only a judge in court of law can annul, void, or nullify a marriage. For purposes of remarriage, there must be a court order declaring the marriage as null and void. Entering into a subsequent marriage without such court declaration means that: (a) the subsequent marriage is void; and (b) the parties open themselves to a possible charge of bigamy.
Support: According to Art. 105 of the Family Code of the Philippines, the following are obliged to support each other to the whole extent set forth in the preceding article: (1) The spouses; (2) Legitimate ascendants and descendants; (3) Parents and their legitimate children and the legitimate and illegitimate children of the latter; (4) Parents and their illegitimate children and the legitimate and illegitimate children of the latter; and (5) Legitimate brothers and sisters, whether of full or half-blood. Therefore, you are obliged to give support to your family and your only son, Bobby.

Legal Recourse: Annulment may be your legal recourse if you want to terminate your marriage with Aunt Marsha, but there are grounds to nullify it by virtue of Art. 45 of the Family Code of the Philippines. Declaration of nullity of marriage may also be your legal recourse ONLY IF it may be proven that such marriage is void or invalid from the beginning. You can also opt to file a Declaration of Nullity of your marriage based on Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines if we can establish that either one of you is psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential requisites of marriage.
Pregnancy Outside Marriage: If it so happen that your girlfriend is pregnant, the status of the child would be illegitimate due to an absence of a court order declaring your previous marriage with Aunt Marsha annulled or void. I hope that my expert legal advice about your circumstance would help you deal with your current problems in your family life. If you have further questions regarding the matter, please dont hesitate to contact me to wherever you find it most convenient. Thank you very much.

Date: To:
07 April 2013 MARICAR G. GIMENEZ
LEGAL OPINION
Unit 8756 Condominium Towers, E. Rodriguez Ave., Quezon City Subject: Legal Opinion on the possibility of bringing a lawsuit against three men committing a crime against you
Dear Ms. Gimenez, Here is the legal opinion you requested. The facts, gathered from you and your documents, are as follows: 1. At around 10:30pm of 22 February 2012, the left rear tire of your black Honda CRV with plate number XKY 232 blew out while on your way home. It appears from your observation that it had run over something really sharp. You were on a dimly lit area along C.P. Garcia in Quezon City and there were hardly any cars in sight. 2. You decided to call for help when three men suddenly appeared out of nowhere, and one of them pointed a gun at you shouting Bumaba ka dyan! which made you drop your phone and obey what they ask of you. 3. You were held at gunpoint and the following valuables are taken: a. Louis Vuitton Retiro PM bag; b. Louis Vuitton Retiro PM wallet with cash amounting to P14,500; c. Credit Cards other Identification Cards; d. iPhone; e. Pair of Diamond Earrings; f. Tennis bracelet; and g. MacBook Pro. 4. After taking possession of your valuables, the three men dragged you to a nearby grassy area. The man with the gun hit you several times and raped you while still at gunpoint to which made you lose consciousness. 5. An old lady woke you up asking of what happened and the next thing you remember is that you are already in the hospital.

From the foregoing facts, it is apparent that the crime committed is ROBBERY WITH RAPE which is a special complex crime punishable in paragraph 2 of Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code with reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua, which reads: "Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons-Penalties.--Any person guilty of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any person shall suffer: "x x x x x x x x x "2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua, when the robbery shall have been accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation, or if by reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in subdivision 1 or article 263 shall have been inflicted: Provided, however, That when the robbery accompanied with rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. "x x x x x x x x x" (Emphasis supplied) According to the case of People vs Clidoro (G.R. No. 143004), the crime of robbery with rape is committed when the following elements concur: (1) the taking of personal property is committed with violence or intimidation against persons; (2) the property taken belongs to another; (3) the taking is done with animo lucrandi; and, (4) the robbery is accompanied by rape. The issue here is whether or not all the three men are liable as principals in the special complex crime of robbery with rape. According to People vs Mendoza (G.R. No. 123186), even if the two of the accused did not commit the criminal act of rape against Ms. Gimenez, they will still be liable for the special complex crime of robbery with rape. The conspiracy to rob is all that is needed to be proven to punish them all as principals in the crime of robbery with rape. The rape may have been perpetrated by only one of them, but they will all be convicted of robbery with

rape, because the rule in this jurisdiction is that whenever a rape is committed as a consequence, or on the occasion of a robbery, all those who took part therein are liable as principals of the crime of robbery with rape, although not all of them actually took part in the rape.[42] It is enough that robbery shall have been accompanied by rape to be punishable under the The Revised Penal Code which does not differentiate whether the rape was committed before, during or after the robbery. Although the narration of facts of Ms. Gimenez, all the three men who took part in the crime are liable with the complex crime of rape as co-principal even if their participation is very minimal as when one of the accused acted as guard while rape was being committed on the occasion of the robbery. In addition, the penalty must be imposed in the maximum degree, inasmuch as the crime was committed (1) in disregard of his sex, (2) during nighttime, and (3) in advantage be taken of superior strength. (Article 14, paragraphs 3, 6 and 15, Revised Penal Code.)
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Law and Notarial Services REGIONAL TRIAL COURT City 2200 Phils. No. 2-23 Street, East Bajac-Bajac, Olongapo NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION Mobile No. 09355312300; Email: robert.aldrin.ortiz@alumni.ateneo.edu BRANCH __________ QUEZON CITY
rd
KARENINA B. LAGO, Plaintiff, - versus CIVIL CASE NO. ______________ FOR: SUPPORT AND DISSOLUTION OF PROPERTY REGIME with PRAYER FOR PROTECTION ORDER And SUPPORT PENDING LITIGATION
DARIUS J. SANTOS, Defendant. x--------------------x MEMORANDUM FOR THE PLAINTIFF COMES NOW, plaintiff, through the undersigned counsel and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully submits the foregoing Memorandum for the Plaintiff, to wit: STATEMENT OF FACTS and CASE: This is a complaint for SUPPORT and DISSOLUTION OF PROPERTY REGIME filed by plaintiff Karenina B. Lago against defendant Darius J. Santos under Article 194 and Article 148 of the Family Code of the Philippines. The parties lived together without the benefit of marriage in Quezon City where they begot three children Coleen in 2003, Cora in 2004, and Carlo in 2009. That during their relationship, they have acquired the following items: a. Lot in Alabang Hills in 2003; b. Second-hand BMW to which defendant later sold; c. Toyota Innova; d. Motorcycle in 2006; e. Several home appliances; f. Ford Escape with Plate Number ACT 001 in 2012; g. 100 shares of stock in San Miguel Corporation. That most of the items acquired during their relationship were acquired mostly from their pooled funds.

Prior to their separation in August 2012, the parties have a huge fight and defendant said hurtful things against the plaintiff and slap her twice in the presence of their children. Defendant also took away plaintiffs personal laptop and Canon EOS camera and their 32 inch Bravia flat screen television. Defendant likewise threatened to took away plaintiffs new Ford Escape car. Defendant after their separation did not provide for the support of their children. Thus, this complaint for Support against the defendant. Plaintiff likewise prays that their property regime be dissolved and that a Temporary Protection Order be issued against the defendant in order to restrain the latter in going to plaintiffs house in order to avoid further physical and verbal abuse. The Temporary Protection Order be made permanent. Defendant on the other hand, claims that during their cohabitation, plaintiff did not contribute to the household expenses. That the properties they acquired came from his own funds. Defendant also denies paternity of their three (3) children. ISSUES a) Whether or not plaintiff had a valid claim for support and can claim for support pending litigation. b) Whether or not the property regime of the parties can be dissolved. c) Whether or not a Temporary Protection Order/Permanent Protection Order can be issued against the defendant. DISCUSSION a) Whether or not plaintiff had a valid claim for support and can claim for support pending litigation. The plaintiff can claim support from the defendant for the sustenance of their three (3) minor children namely Coleen, Cora and Carlo, all surnamed Santos. Article 194 of the Family code provide as follows, to wit:

Art. 194. Support comprises everything indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing, medical attendance, education and transportation, in keeping with the financial capacity of the family. Inasmuch as the defendant is an endocrinologist-internist by profession, he can ably support the minor children in the amount of P20,000.00 a month or a total of P60,000.00. Said amount is necessary in order that the children can live comfortably in accordance with the social standing and financial capacity of the family. The children are all enrolled in exclusive private schools. The claim of defendant that the children are not his are immaterial considering that he had acknowledge paternity of said children in their respective Certificates of Live Birth. That defendant did not impugn the filiation of the said children in proper court proceedings. A copy of the childrens Certificates of Live Birth are hereto attached and made part hereof as Annexes A, B and C. Plaintiff prays that pending litigation support should be given in order to defray the expenses of their minor children. b) Whether or not the property regime of the parties can be dissolved. It is admitted that the parties had lived together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage. That they have acquired properties during their cohabitation, to wit: a. Lot in Alabang Hills in 2003; b. Second-hand BMW to which defendant later sold; c. Toyota Innova; d. Motorcycle in 2006; e. Several home appliances; f. Ford Escape with Plate Number ACT 001 in 2012; g. 100 shares of stock in San Miguel Corporation. Although, it can be said that defendant had contributed mostly for the purchase of the foregoing items, the same were purchase during their cohabitation. The law presumes that the parties are the co-owners of the said properties. The contribution of the plaintiff, aside from contributing a small amount, also includes her efforts, consisting of the caring and maintenance of the family and the household.

c) Whether or not a Temporary Protection Order/Permanent Protection Order can be issued against the defendant. That defendant, Darius J. Santos, is very controlling, dominant, verbally abusive mate, and have a temper problem. Defendant during their cohabitation, had a fight with the plaintiff to the point that the defendant got himself an armalite in good condition which he sometimes brandished in front of the plaintiff. Defendant had hit the plaintiff twice prior to their separation even in front of their children. Plaintiff had already feared for her life and that of her children who had been traumatized by the incident. That the Honorable Court should grant a Temporary Protection Order ordering the defendant to stay away from petitioner and her children at a distance specified by the court, and to stay away from the residence, school, place of employment, or any specified place frequented by the defendant and their children and to direct the lawful possession and use by plaintiff the Ford Escape car, and other essential personal effects, regardless of ownership. The defendant inflicted Psychological violence and physical violence and Economic abuse against the plaintiff.
Republic Act 9262 otherwise 9262 otherwise known as the Anti-Violence Against Women
and Children Act of 2004 defines Psychological Violence and Economic Abuse as follows, to wit: "Psychological violence" refers to acts or omissions causing or likely to cause mental or emotional suffering of the victim such as but not limited to intimidation, harassment, stalking, damage to property, public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and mental infidelity. It includes causing or allowing the victim to witness the physical, sexual or psychological abuse of a member of the family to which the victim belongs, or to witness pornography in any form or to witness abusive injury to pets or to unlawful or unwanted deprivation of the right to custody and/or visitation of common children. "Economic abuse" refers to acts that make or attempt to make a woman financially dependent which includes, but is not limited to the following: 1. withdrawal of financial support or preventing the victim from engaging in any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity, except in cases wherein the other spouse/partner objects on valid, serious and moral grounds as defined in Article 73 of the Family Code;

2. deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial resources and the right to the use and enjoyment of the conjugal, community or property owned in common; 3. destroying household property; 4. controlling the victims' own money or properties or solely control Defendant had withheld support to their children and likewise threatens to get the new car being used by the plaintiff. The aforementioned acts of the defendant violates of the provisions of Republic Act 9262 otherwise known as the Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act of 2004. Hence, the issuance of the Temporary Protection Order and ultimately Permanent Protection Order is proper. PRAYER WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed of the Honorable Court, that the foregoing Memorandum for the Plaintiff be NOTED. Other relief are prayed for.
ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

Counsel of for the Plaintiff No. 2-23rd Street, East Bajac-Bajac Olongapo City

Atty. Robert Aldrin B. Ortiz: Mr. Jose Abusado

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Atty. Robert Aldrin B. Ortiz: Mr. Jose Abusado

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B.

04 April 2013 MR. JOSE ABUSADO 23 Katipunan Ave., Quezon City

LETTER WRITING ITEM No. 1

Very truly yours,

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ Counsel of Mrs. Naty Ferrer

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 2-A

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 2-B

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ TAN SY CO & ASSOCIATES

LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 3

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 4

Very truly yours, ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 5

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

LEGAL WRITING ITEM No. 6

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

Very truly yours, ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

07 April 2013 MARICAR G. GIMENEZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

Very truly yours, ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ATTY. ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

ROBERT ALDRIN B. ORTIZ

Вам также может понравиться