1.

Complaint Affidavit

Republic of the Philippines

____________________________
x-----------------------------------x

)
) S. S.

COMPLAINT AFFIDAVIT
I, ________________________________, Filipino, of legal age,
with
postal
address
at
_____________________________________________ , after being duly
sworn in to accordance with law, hereby depose and say:
1.
That
I
am
filing
a
complaint
against__________________________________ for
Estafa
and
for
violation of BP 22, who can be served with summons and notices
at
_________________________________________________________________.
2.
That sometime on _________________________ at
my
residence
in
the
City
of
Manila, _____________________________ convinced me to take her
check for rediscounting representing that the checks will be good
on the date indicated on the checks.
3.
That the respondent delivered several checks
and TWO (2) among several checks are the subject of this case
amounting to P235,000.00, to wit:
_____________________ BANK (Annex A)
May 20, 2011 P58,750.00

03xxxxxx

_____________________ BANK (Annex B)

June 20, 2011 P58,750.00

03xxxxxx

____________________
TOTAL:

P117,500.00

4.
That on the dates of the check I deposited the
same and to my dismay they all came back with annotations
ACCOUNT CLOSED.
5.
That she defrauded me to part with my money
when he issued a check with insufficient funds and worse account
closed. She issues checks knowing very well that the same is
worthless.
6.
That upon bouncing of the checks I
PERSONALLY delivered a demand letter to the respondent giving
her a chance to make good the payments of the checks but she
chose to ignore the same.
7.
Herein attached is the Demand Letter
delivered personally to the respondent on ____________, 2011
as ANNEX C.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixed my signature this
___ day of ____________ 2011 in _________________, Philippines.
_________________________________
Complainant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ______
day of ___________,2011 in __________. I further certify that I have
personally examined the Affiant and I am satisfied that she
voluntarily executed her Counter-Affidavit and that she
understood the contents of the same.

FELISSA MARIE PORTIN

Counsel for Petitioner
Sta Mesa, Manila
Attorney Roll No. 86754

PTR No. 16- 9875/ 02-15-2017

IBP No. 16-86753/02-15-2017
MCLE Compliance No.v-000076432

2. PETITION FOR REVIEW

Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICENATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
Office of the Secretary
Padre Faura St., Ermita, Manila
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,Plaintiff - appellant
Criminal case No. 12345-A
For: Qualified Theft
Article310 of the Revised Penal
Code
-versusCHRISTOPHER AGUSTIN AVES,Accused - appellee

x---------------------------------------------X
PETITION FOR REVIEW
COMES NOW, the undersigned petitioner, unto this Honorable
Office respectfully avers:
1. That on _________ the undersigned Chief of Police of Las Pinas
Police District, Las Pinas City upon complaint of the private
offended party filed acase against

CHRISTOPHER AGUSTIN AVES of No. 3 Manggahan Compound,

talon V, Las Pinas City for QUALIFIED THEFT docketed under IS No.
12345-A before the Office of the City Prosecutor 2. That for the
information of the Honorable Secretary this case started, a
sfollows :
a. That on the morning of 18 July 2013, I was at the place of my
work site.
b. That on the same day at around 10:30 to 11 oclock in the
morning, a certain Wally Limjoco along with two of our safety
officers visited our job site.
c. That such visit is a surprise inspection was among other things
is to confiscate our electrical tools.
d. We saw them enter our barracks from a distance of 25 to 30
meters from our position; however, we dont have any idea as to
what theyre doing exactly inside barracks.
e. That after a few minutes, one of our co-workers came to tell us
that Mr. Wally Limjoco and the accompanying safety officers found
a tool box that contains metal steel.
f. In spite of the apparent incident, Mr. Wally Limjoco didnt say
anything to us.
g. That during our lunch break, we saw a yellow tool box scattered
on the floor, with some steel scrap
h. At around 2 to 3 oclock in the afternoon, the safety officer gets
the tool box with scrapped metal in the command of Wally
Limjoco including some steel and waste materials which were
brought to the main office at Tandang Sora, Quezon City.
i. On the same day, around 10 oclock in the evening, Andreo
Laitan the Field Engineer woke me up and informed us that Wally
Limjoco came back accompanied by a policeman.

j. Wally Limjoco entered into the barracks with Norvell Madrid and
one police officer in civilian attire. He was already shouting with
profanity, yet, i still wanted to negotiate to Mr. Limjoco as to what
is his problem against me, he said to me putang ina mo ka,
puputukan kita, then he grabbed his gun from his waist, cock the
barrel then pointed the gun at me. This was witnessed by my coworkers present at that moment.
k. They brought me at Bonifacio Global City police station, and
then they brought to Pateros District Hospital, for a medico legal
check-up, however, the doctor just made a few and brief
questions asking if I am sick or if I am suffering from any ailment
whatsoever, then brought me back to the police station, they put
me inside the jail cell.
l. That on the 19th day of July 2013, after spending sleepless
night inside the jail cell, Norvell Madrid and Andreo Laitan along
with the arresting officers, I was brought to the Hall of Justice for
case filing of the crime I didnt know about in the first place.
m. That I stayed inside the jail cell for up to the 24th day of July
2013, until my wife came to pick me up saying that they are
already releasing me for the complainants are already
withdrawing the case charged against me.3. That on Las Pinas
City, October 1, 2013 the undersigned received the Resolution of
the Honorable Prosecutor copy of which is attached as Annex
A disposing the case as follows:

WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING,

It is most respectfully recommended that the complaint filed be
dismissed for the lack of probable cause.
4. That the undersigned erred in considering the basis of the
complaint filed.

5. That with due respect to the Honorable Prosecutor, the

undersigned believed that he committed error on the following:
a) That the complainant had pieces of evidence proving the guilt
the accused, furthermore, on the Motion for Reconsideration, the
complainant even offered new evidence and witness that will
further the case complaint.
6. Attached as integral part of this petition are the following:
a) Proof of service of this Petition to the Honorable Prosecutor
(AnnexB)
b) Proof of service of this Petition to the Appellee
c) Other Records of the Case
WHEREFORE, the undersigned respectfully prays for the setting
aside of the appealed resolution of Assistant Prosecutor
ARTUROVALLEJO dated October 1, 2013 and that the honorable
prosecutor be directed to file information so demanded by the
plaintiff appellant. Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise
prayed for.
Las Pinas City, October 1, 2013
P/Supt. PEDRO NORTE
Chief of Police, Las Pinas Police Districy
VERIFICATION
I,
WALLY LIMJOCO
, of legal age, after having been duly sworn in accordance with
law, depose and state that:

1. I am a Plaintiff - Appellant in the above-stated case;2. I caused

the preparation of the foregoing petition;3. I have read the
contents thereof and the facts stated therein are true and correct
of my personal knowledge and/or on the basis of copies of
documents and records in my possession.
WALLY LIMJOCO
Plaintiff - appellant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this 1st day of
October, 2016 in Manila, Philippines. Affiant exhibited his Passport
ID with No. 8675322 issued at Department of Foreign Affairs,
Pasay City on December 15,2015.

Doc No_____
Page No.____
Book No.____
Series of _____

City Copy furnished:

ARTURO VALLEJO
Assistant City Prosecutor

ATTY FELISSA MARIE PORTIN

Notary Public for Manila
Commission Order No. 986573212/31/2018
Attorney Roll No. 86754
PTR No. 16- 9875/ 02-15-2017
IBP No. 16-86753/02-15-2017
MCLE Compliance No. v-000076432

3. COUNTER AFFIDAVIT

Republic of the Philippines

City of Tagbilaran
Province of Bohol S.S

COUNTER AFFIDAVIT
I, EDGARDO PUSLIK SR. Filipino, of legal age, married to
Lorena G. Puslik, the father of the said victim, and resident of
Guinsularan, Duero, Bohol, after having been duly sworn to
in accordance with the law do hereby depose and says:
1.That I am accused for the crime of Parricide, now pending
before the Provincial Prosecution Office of Bohol;
2.That I vehemently deny the allegations in the complaint
filed against me for being false, fabricated and malicious, the
truth being that;
a.That in the morning of November 22, 2007 my friend Juan

Manuel Marques and I went to Barangay Langkis. Because

we was invited by our friends birthday party.
b.That morning of the same date, my son Edgardo Puslik Jr.
want to come with us in Barangay Langkis. And
c.That I told my son to go home because his younger brother
is waiting for him and I dont want him to go with us.
d.But instead his not listening to me and I am force to get a
stick and when he saw im holding a stick in my hand he
immediately run home and crying.
e.That on the whole afternoon until evening of November 22,
2007. were having fun with Juan Manuel Marques and Manny
Pacquaio then we got drunk and decided to sleep their until
morning.
3.That I was extremely surprised when I received a subpoena
4.That the case filed against me is motivated by bad faith.
5.That I am executing this counter affidavit to attest to the
truth of the foregoing statement and to support for the
dismissal of the case filed against me.

I WITNESS WHEREOF, I herby affix my signature this 7th

day of January 2007 in the City of Tagbilaran, Bohol,
Philippines.

EDGARDO PUSLIK SR
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this 1st day of October,
2016 in Manila, Philippines. Affiant exhibited his Passport ID with

No. 8675322 issued at Department of Foreign Affairs, Pasay City

on December 15,2015.

ATTY FELISSA MARIE PORTIN

Notary Public for Manila
Commission Order No. 986573212/31/2018
Attorney Roll No. 86754
PTR No. 16- 9875/ 02-15-2017
IBP No. 16-86753/02-15-2017
MCLE Compliance No. v-000076432

Doc No_____
Page No.____
Book No.____
4. AFFIDAVIT OF DESISTANCE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)

CITY OF MANILA
) S.S.
AFFIDAVIT OF DESISTANCE
I, Juan del la Cruz, of legal age, single, and a
resident of # 123 Main St., Malate, Manila, after
having duly sworn to in accordance with law hereby
depose and state:
1. I am the complaining witness for Serious
Physical Injuries against Jesus Santos in the case
entitled "People of the Philippines versus Jesus
Santos", Criminal Case No. 12345, Metropolitan Trial
Court, Branch No. 11, City of Manila.
2. After my sober and soul searching
assessment and analysis of the incident, I have
realized that because I was not wearing

my eyeglasses and it was dark, I can not point out,

without a doubt the accused or any other person/s
who inflicted harm against me.
3. Since I could not state with certainty and
without doubt the liability of Jesus Santos, in fairness
to him, I am permanently withdrawing my complaint
against him. I clear him of whatever responsibility or
liability to me.
4. I hereby inform the City Prosecutor of Manila
that I am withdrawing my complaint for Serious
Physical Injuries in Criminal Case No. 12345
entitled "People of the Philippines versus Jesus
Santos", Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch No. 11, City
of Manila.
5. I likewise request the Metropolitan Trial
Court, Branch No. 11, City of Manila to dismiss with
prejudice the said criminal case.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereby set my hand
this __ day of September 20__ at the City of Manila.

Juan de la Cruz
Complaining Witness
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this 1st day of October,
2016 in Manila, Philippines. Affiant exhibited his Passport ID with
No. 8675322 issued at Department of Foreign Affairs, Pasay City
on December 15,2015.

ATTY FELISSA MARIE PORTIN

Notary Public for Manila

Commission Order No. 986573212/31/2018

Attorney Roll No. 86754
PTR No. 16- 9875/ 02-15-2017
IBP No. 16-86753/02-15-2017
MCLE Compliance No. v-000076432

Doc No_____
Page No.____
Book No.____

5. INFORMATION

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 147
Makati City
PEOPLEOF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No. 123456
Homicide
AKU SADO,
Accused.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

- versus for

INFORMATION
The undersigned Assistant City Prosecutor hereby accuses Aku
Sado of the crime of Homicide committed as follows:
That on or about August 12, 2013, Makati City within the
jurisdiction of this court, the said accused, armed with a bladed
weapon, with intent to kill, did then and there willfully, unlawfully
and feloniously attack, assault and stab one VIC TIMA, thereby
inflicting upon him a fatal wound which directly caused his death.
Contrary

to

law.

Makati, Philippines, August 22, 2013.

ATTY. BEN TONG

Private Prosecutor

WITNESSES:

MARIA MAKILING

JUAN TAMAD

CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation was conducted
in the above-entitled case,and there is prima facie evidence that
the crime of Homicide has been committed and that the accused
is probably guilty thereof.

ATTY. BEN TONG

Private Prosecutor

Bail Recommended: None

6. PETITION FOR BAIL

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 147
Makati City
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Crim Case No. 12345
- versus for
Frustrated Murder
AKU SADO,

Accused.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

PETITION FOR BAIL

Accused, through the undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable
Court, respectfully
states:
1. That accused is currently detained at the Makati City Jail for the charge of
Frustrated Murder and has been behind bars since his arrest on August 1,
2013;
2. That no bail has been recommended for his temporary release on the
assumption that the evidence of guilt is strong;
3. That the prosecution's evidence of guilt against accused, however, is weak
as there is no direct evidence that will point to the accused to have
committed the the charges against him. The records will show that accused
was malicious implicated in the case through the sworn statements of SINU
NGALING and BULA AN who subsequently recanted their testimonies and
confessed, among others, that they were made to sign the "affidavits of
witnesses" against their will. (copies of the Affidavits of Recantation are
hereto attached as Annexes "A" and "B")
4. That there is no other physical or documentary evidence to show that
accused is guilty of the crime charged;.
5. That the burden of showing that evidence of guilt is strong is on the
prosecution, and since this fact is not satisfactorily shown, accused is
entitled to bail as a matter of right during the pendency of the criminal case.
WHEREFORE, upon prior notice and hearing, it is respectfully prayed of
this Honorable Court that accused AKU SADO be allowed to post bail for his
temporary liberty pending trial of the criminal charge against him.
Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

Respectfully submitted.
15 August 2013
City of Makati.
ATTY. VX YZ
Counsel for the

Accused
NOTICE OF HEARING
THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT
Regional Trial Court, Branch 147
Makati City
Greetings!

Please submit the foregoing motion to the Honorable Court on August 27, 2013 at
8:30 in the morning for its favorable consideration and approval.
VX YZ
Copy

furnished

PROSECUTOR WX
Office of the City Prosecutor, Makati City
ATTY. AB CD
Private Prosecutor
2233 Zamora Street, Pasay City

by

personal

service:
YZ

7. DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 40, MANILA CITY

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,

versus

Crim. Case No. Q131745

For: FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC
DOCUMENT

SPO3 ISIDORO B. BOTE,

Accused.
x ----------------------------------------------- x

DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

The Accused SONNY MANGALINDAN, through the undersigned counsel,

most respectfully submits its Demurrer to Evidence and avers:

BASIS FOR THE DEMURRER

It is incumbent upon the prosecution to adduce evidence sufficient to prove

beyond reasonable doubt (a) the commission of the crime, and (b) the precise
degree of participation therein by the accused (Gutib vs. Court of Appeals, 312
SCRA 365).

The charges against an accused must be dismissed if there is no

competent or sufficient evidence adduced that would sustain the charges against
him, should the same be raised in a demurrer to the evidence. Section 23, Rule
119 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides:

Sec. 23 After the prosecution rests its case, the court may dismiss the
action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence (1) on its own initiative after
giving the prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (2) upon demurrer to
evidence filed by the accused with or without leave of court.
x x x

It is well-settled rule that conviction for a criminal offense should be based

on clear and positive evidence and not on mere assumption. (Gaerlan vs. CA 179
SCRA 20). The burden lies upon the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused
beyond reasonable doubt rather that upon the accused to prove that he is in fact
innocent.

(People vs. Lati, 184 SCRA 336).

Failing in this, the presumption of

innocence will prevail. (Sec. 1 (a) Rule 115).

ARGUMENTS/DISCUSSION

The only witness for the prosecution was REYNALDO P. CAMILLO. It cannot
be overemphasized that the affidavit of the complainant and the testimony of said
witness showed that he had no personal knowledge of the alleged theft that was
committed on 01 January 2006.

Moreover what is more dubious is that the

affidavit of said complainant was done on 04 February 2006, more than one (1)
month after the alleged incident took place.

Said witness did not see the alleged

taking, stealing and carrying away of the cash money since he was on vacation at
Baguio City.

Complainant was miles away when the alleged taking, stealing and

carrying away of the cash money was done. It was highly improbable for him to
witness the incident. In complainants affidavit, he based his accusation only on the
information of his grandson which is also the son of the accused that it was his
father who entered the room. There was no mention made that accused was seen
taking, stealing and carrying away the cash money.

The same information was

given to him by his daughter who is also the wife of the accused. In other words,
there was no witness at all who had seen the alleged taking, stealing and carrying

away of the cash money. Noteworthy is the fact that the grandson and the wife of
the accused did not testify to corroborate the testimony of the complainant. Hence,
the basis of the complainant in charging the accused for theft is not substantiated
considering that it is purely hearsay and have no probative value whether objected
to or not.

It was emphasized by the defense in their cross-examination of said

witness that he had no personal knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the

alleged taking, stealing and carrying away of the cash money. In fact the
complainant himself was having a hard time remembering the exact amount of the
cash money that was allegedly taken whether it was P120,000.00 or P150,0000.00.
There is no need to discuss the other elements of theft since the prosecution was
not able to establish the alleged taking, stealing and carrying away of the cash
money.

Indeed, any oral or documentary evidence is hearsay by nature if its

probative value is not based on the personal knowledge of the witness but on the
knowledge of some other person not on the witness stand. (2 Regalado, Remedial
Law Compendium, 1989 6th Rev. Ed., p. 486). By virtue of this legal aphorism, no
probative value can attach to the alleged confession of Carlos albeit no objection
thereto was interposed by the defense.

(People vs. Villahermosa, (CA) 67 O.G.

4929 citing People vs. Cabral, et. Al. Verily, in criminal cases the admission of
hearsay evidence would be a violation of the constitutional provision that the
accused shall enjoy the right of being confronted with the witnesses testifying
against him and to cross-examine them. Moreover the court is without opportunity
to test the credibility of hearsay statements by observing the demeanor of the
person who supposedly made them People vs. Melo Santos, 245 SCRA 569, July 3,
1995.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that the

Honorable Court that this Demurrer to Evidence be granted and that the criminal
charge of Theft against the accused SONNY MANGALINDAN be DISMISSED.

Other reliefs, just and equitable, are likewise prayed for.

Quezon City, Philippines, May 28, 2016.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Public Attorneys Office
Rm. B-29 Hall of Justice, Quezon City

By:

ATTY. CAROLINE L. TOBIAS

Public Attorney II

NOTICE OF HEARING

Hon. John Patrick Corpuz

Assistant City Prosecutor

Clerk of Court
RTC 223

Greetings!

Please submit the foregoing Demurrer to Evidence for the approval and
consideration of the Honorable Court on 29 May 2007 at 8:30 a.m.

CAROLINE L. TOBIAS

Copy Furnished:

Hon. John Patrick Corpuz

Assistant City Prosecutor

SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

CERTIORARI WITH PRAYER OF ISSUANCE OF TRO

MANDAMUS
QUO WARRANTO
HABEAS DATA
EMINENT DOMAIN

CIVIL CASES
1. COMPLAINT FOR EJECTMENT

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 1
KRUL

-versusMEGAN

ACOSTA,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL CASE No. 98765
FOR: Unlawful Detainer
VITUG,
Defendant.

x-----------------------------------x
COMPLAINT

1.
2.

3.
4.

5.
6.

7.

8.

1.

COMES NOW, the plaintiff, through the undersigned counsel and unto this
Honorable Court, most respectfully avers:
That the plaintiff, KRUL ACOSTA, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, single,
with residence and postal address at 123 Benitez Street, Manila;
That the defendant, MEGAN VITUG, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, single,
with residence and postal address at 456 Modesto Street, Manila, where they
may be served with summons and other court processes;
The plaintiff is the owner of a land over which an apartment had been
constructed located 654 San Pedro Street, Manila;
By virtue of a contract of lease, the plaintiff leased unto the defendant the
aforesaid apartment for a consideration of P5,000.00 a month as rental to be paid
within the first ten (10) days of each month starting November 3, 2011;
The defendant failed to pay the agreed rental for several months starting
February 19, 2012 up to the present;
On May 3, 2012, the plaintiff sent a letter of demand to vacate the
apartment which was received by the defendant as shown in the registry return
receipt hereto attached as Annex A;
Despite said letter of demand which was repeated by oral demands, the
defendant failed and still refused to pay the agreed amount of rentals and to
vacated the apartment;
By reason of failure of the defendant to vacate the premises and to pay the
unpaid rentals, the plaintiff was compelled to file this complaint engaging the
services of counsel in the amount of P10,000.00.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed unto
this Honorable Court that, after hearing, judgment be rendered ordering the
defendant:
To vacate the subject premises;

2.

To pay the amount of P5,000.00 per month as compensation for the

reasonable use of the subject premises until they finally vacate the said
premises;
3.
To pay the plaintiff the cost of the suit.
City
of
Manila,
September
24,
2012.
REYES, TOLENTINO AND CRUZ LAW OFFICE
Counsel for the Plaintiff
Unit 123, Victoria Tower I
Taft Avenue, Manila
By:
Louise Reyes
Roll of Attorney No. 98765
IBP No. 12345/2-5-12/Manila
PTR No. 87654/12-22-11/Manila
VERIFICATION/CERTIFICATION OF FORUM SHOPPING
Republic
City of Manila

1.
2.
3.
4.

5.

of

) S.S.

the

Philippines

I, KRUL ACOSTA, of legal age, Filipino citizen, single and resident of 123
Benitez Street, Manila, after having been duly sworn to in accord Nance with law
do hereby depose and say:
That I am the plaintiff in the above-entitled case;
That I have caused the preparation of the foregoing complaint and have
read the allegations contained therein;
The allegations in the said complaint are true and correct of my own
knowledge and authentic records;
I hereby certify that I have not commenced any other action or proceeding
involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to
the best of my knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein;
That if I should learn thereafter that a similar action or proceeding has
been filed or is pending, I hereby undertake to report that fact within five (5) days

therefrom to the court or agency where the original pleading and sworn
certification contemplated herein have been filed;
6.
I executed this verification/certification to attest to the truth of the foregoing
facts and to comply with the provisions of Adm. Circular No. 04-94 of the
Honorable Supreme Court.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this 24th of
September 2012, in the City of Manila.
KRUL ACOSTA
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _______ day of September,
2012, in the City of Manila, affiant exhibiting to me his Drivers License No. 12345
issued by the Land Transportation Office on April 8, 2012 at the City of Manila.
ATTY. NO CASE
Notary Public
My Commission Expires Dec. 31, 2012
Roll of Attorney No. 34567
IBP No. 12345/2-5-12/Manila
PTR No. 87654/12-22-11/Manila

Doc. No. ________

Page No. _______
Book No. _______
Series of 2012.

2. COMPLAINT FOR SUM OF MONEY BASED ON PN

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
FIRST JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH ____ BAGUIO CITY Y
Plaintiff, Civil Case No. _____
-versusFor: Collection of Sum of Money,
Defendant. x------------------------------x

COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by and through the undersigned counsel and unto this
Honorable Court, most respectfully state that:
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff is a Filipino, of legal age, single and a residing at
#07 Bakakeng Norte, Baguio City. He may be served with
notices, orders and processes of this Honorable Court though
undersigned counsel;
2. Defendant is Filipino, of legal age, single and residing at #38
Bakakeng Norte, Baguio City, where he may be served with
summons and other court processes;
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

3. On June 30, 2014, for value received, the defendant

executed and delivered to plaintiff a promissory note in the
amount of EIGHTY THOUSAND PESOS (Php80, 000.00) to be
fully paid on or before August 8, 2014. A copy of the
promissory note is hereto attached as
Annex A;
4. That despite the lapse of the period, the defendant failed to
pay the amount subject of the promissory note nor any part
thereof

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

5. On July 15, 2014, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into
a loan agreement whereby the defendant borrowed from the
plaintiff the sum of THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS
(Php300, 000.00) which became due on September 15,
2014. A copy of the notarized acknowledgement of debt by
the defendant is hereto attached as Annex B;
6. That the defendant has not paid the amount subject of the
contract of loan or any part thereof on the date it became
due;
7. The plaintiff sent separate demand letters to the defendant
on October 30, 2015 and December 1, 2015 for the
fulfillment of the obligations subject of the promissory and
loan contract. However, these demands were unheeded. A
copy of said demand letters are hereto attached as Annex
C and Annex C-1;
8. That the continued refusal of the defendant to settle his
account prompted the plaintiff to lodge a complaint with the
barangay officials of Barangay Bakakeng Norte, Baguio City.
A Certificate to File Action, copy of which is hereto attached

as Annex D, was issued on January 5, 2015 for failure of

the parties to come to an amicable settlement;
9. On February 5, 2015, defendant left the Philippines for the
United States of America;
10.
Defendant owns the following properties in the
Philippines: a)Mercedes Benz car, 2010 model; and b)A
parcel of land located in Baguio City having an assessed
value of Php200,000.00; 11. That by virtue of the
defendants unwarranted and malicious acts, the plaintiff
has been compelled to litigate and to engage the services of
a counsel.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that after due hearing,
judgment be rendered in favor of the Plaintiff and against the
Defendant in this manner:
1) That the amount of THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY THOUSAND
(Php380, 000.00) be paid to the plaintiff by the defendant
representing the total amount of the promissory note and
the loan contract, with interest thereon at the legal rate of
6% per annum from the time of the filing of the complaint
and until the same is fully paid;
2) That a writ of preliminary attachment be issued to place in
custodia legis and attach as security for the satisfaction of
any judgment the properties of the Defendant abovementioned;
3) Attorneys fees equivalent to the 10% of the principal
amount;
4) Php10,000.00 as litigation expenses; and 5)

Other reliefs as this Honorable Court may deem appropriate and

equitable are likewise prayed for. Baguio City, Philippines,
September 10, 2015.

FELISSA MARIE PORTIN

Attorney for Plaintiff
No. 311 Vath Building, Baguio City
Roll No.: 508128
PTR No.: 1112345 01-18-2015 Baguio City
IBP No.: 176184 01-18-2015 Baguio City
MCLE Compliance No.: 455813 08-05-2015

3. COMPLAINT FOR SUM OF MONEY WITH APPLICATION OF REPLEVIN

4. ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 40, Manila City
Cristina Bernadette C. Aquino
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 52584
-versusFor: Collection of
Money

Sum

of

Aiai delas Alas

Defendant.
X-----------------------------------------------x
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE
The Clerk of Court
Regional Trial Court
Branch 40, Manila
Kindly enter the appearance of the undersigned as counsel
above-entitled case with the conformity of the plaintiff, Kristina
Bernadette C.
Aquino, as shown below.
Accordingly, it is respectfully prayed that the undersigned be
furnished copies of all pleadings, orders, and notices relative to
the instant
case at its address stated below.
Manila, Philippines, October 04, 2016

MYRA I. VALDEZ
Counsel for
Plaintiff
Suite 242B, Espana
Towers
728 Espana St, Brgy 540, Manila
City
Roll of Attorney No. 110972 dated
02/16/2016
PTR No. 030472 dated
02/16/2016

MCLE
02/16/2016

with my conforme:
Kristina Bernadette C. Aquino
Plaintiff

Copy furnished by personal service:

ATTY. Mhatt T. Talo
Counsel of the Defendant
Unit 2102 Sun Residences
P. Florento St., Brgy. 510, Manila

No.

102896

dated

5. WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 40, Manila City
Cristina Bernadette C. Aquino
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 52584
-versusFor: Collection of
Money
Aiai delas Alas
Defendant.
X-----------------------------------------------x

Sum

of

MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL

COMES NOW, the undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable
Court respectfully states that:
1. She is the counsel of record for the plaintiff in the aboveentitled case.
2. With the conformity of my client as shown below, I am
withdrawing as her counsel in view of my acceptance to the
position of Deputy Solicitor-General of the Office of the SolicitorGeneral effective 15 October 2016.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed the appearance of the
undersigned counsel for the petitioner be considered withdrawn.
Manila, Philippines, October 04, 2016

Doc No_____
Page No.____
Book No.____

ATTY FELISSA MARIE PORTIN

Notary Public for Manila
Commission Order No. 986573212/31/2018
Attorney Roll No. 86754
PTR No. 16- 9875/ 02-15-2017
IBP No. 16-86753/02-15-2017
MCLE Compliance No. v-000076432

with my conforme:

Kristina Bernadette C. Aquino

Plaintiff
NOTICE
The Clerk Of Court
Regional Trial Court
Branch 40, Manila
Please submit the foregoing Motion for consideration and
approval of this Honorable Court immediately upon receipt hereof
due its non-litigious nature.
ATTY. FELISSA MARIE
PORTIN

Copy furnished by personal service:

ATTY. MHATT T. TALO
Counsel of the Defendant
Unit 2102 Sun Residences
P. Florento St., Brgy. 510, Manila
Greetings:
Please take notice that in view of the nature of the foregoing
Motion, the undersigned has requested the Clerk of Court to
submit the same for the consideration and approval to the
Honorable Court , immediately upon receipt hereof.

ATTY. FELISSA MARIE

PORTIN

6.
7.
8.
9.

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM
MOTION TO DISMISS
MOTION TO ADMIT

10.MOTION FOR EXTENTION OF TIME

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 40, Manila City
Cristina Bernadette C. Aquino
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 54682
-versusFor: Collection of
Money

Sum

of

Aiai delas Alas

Defendant.
X-----------------------------------------------x
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
(to file Answer)
Respondent, by undersigned
Honorable Court, respectfully avers:

counsel,

and

unto

this

1.That, on 22 September 2016, I was served a copy of the Order

relative to the abovecited case requiring me within ten days, or
until 02 October 2016 to file an answer.

2.That, I would not be able to comply within the allowed period as

I still have to obtain the services of a counsel.
3.That, considering the financial repercussion with respect to my
unemployed condition, I fear that I cannot immediately get a
counsel.
4.That, in lieu of this, I am constrained to request an extension of
30 days from 02 October, 2016, or until 01 December 2016 within
which to file my answer.
5.That, this motion is being filed in good faith and not intended to
delay the proceeding of the case.
WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing considerations and in
the interest of equity, it is respectfully prayed that the respondent
be granted an extension of thirty days or until 01 December 2016
within which to file an answer.

Manila City, Philippines, 26 September 2016.

Aiai delas Alas
Defendant
Unit 210B, Ubelt
Residences
No. 12 F. Cayco St., Brgy. 512
Sampaloc,
Manila
REQUEST / NOTICE OF HEARING
The Clerk of Court

Regional Trial Court

Branch 40, Manila City
Please submit the foregoing motion for extension of time to
file counter-affidavit immediately upon receipt hereof, for the
consideration and approval of this Honorable Court.
Aiai delas
Alas
Unit

Defendant
210B, Ubelt

Residences
No. 12 F. Cayco St., Brgy.
512
Sampaloc,
Manila
Copy Furnished:
MYRA I. VALDEZ
Counsel for Plaintiff
Suite 242B, Espana Towers
728 Espana St, Brgy 540, Manila City
WRITTEN EXPLANATION
This Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer has been
effected through registered mail and not personal service on
account of insufficiency of manpower services
Aiai delas
Alas
Defendant

11.MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT

12.MOTION TO LIFT ORDER OF DEFAULT
13.EX PARTE MOTION TO SET CASE FOR PRE TRIAL
14.SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR PRE TRIAL

SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, ERIK T. SANTOS , of legal age, single, Filipino, with
residence at 123 Malago Street, Project 2, Manila City, do hereby
name, constitute and appoint PEDRO PENDUKO, of legal age, and
with residence at 69 Naligaw St., Project 4, Quezon City, to be my
true and lawful AttorneyinFact and in my name, place and stead,
do and perform the following specific act:
To make, sign, execute, and deliver and all documents and
other writings in my name of whatever nature or kind, including but
not limited to my PRE-TRIAL, in connection with my
auto
loan
with
the
Bank
of
the
Philippine
Islands
Makati
Branch and/or any bank or financial institution.

HEREBY GIVING AND GRANTING unto my said attorneyinfact, or

her substitute full power and authority to do and perform every
lawful act and thing whatsoever requisite or necessary or proper to
be done in the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as we
ought or could lawfully do
if personally present, and hereby
ratifying and conforming all our said Attorneyinfact shall do or
cause to be done under and by virtue of these presents.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto set my hand this 26th day
of August 2016 at Manila City.

ERIK T. SANTOS
Principal

Conforme:

PEDRO PENDUKO
AttorneyinFact

Signed in the presence of:

KIM CHIU

Before Me, this

GERALDANDERSON

26th day of

August 2016 in the City of Manila,

Philippines , personally appeared Mr. Jeffrey Salas with Passport No.

EE8845678 issued at Department of Foreign Affairs, Manila City on
February 12, 2016 and Tax Identification No. 508665816, known to me
to be the same person who executed the foregoing instrument, and he
acknowledged to me that the same is his free act and deed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and

affixed my notarial seal, the day and place above written.

Atty. Imogen G. Mangibin

Notary Public for the City of Manila
18 ERM Bldg., Anonas St., Sta. Mesa, Manila
Appointment No. 652 until December 31, 2016
Roll of Attorney No. 33457
PTR No. 44556678- 01/14/16-City of Manila;
IBP No. 123457-01/07/16-City of Manila;
MCLE Compliance No. 9429-March 27, 2016

Doc. No. 01;

Page No. 22;
Book No. 18;
Series of 2016.

15.PRE TRTIAL BRIEF

16.MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT
17.MOTION FOR INTERVENTION
18.REQUEST FOR THE ISSUANCE OF SUBPEONA
19.FORMAL OFFER TO EVIDENCE
20.MOTION FOR EXSECUTION
21.NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS
22.THIRD PARTY CLAIM
23.MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
24.NOTICE OF APPEAL
25.APPEAL BRIEF
26.AFFIDAVIT OF MERIT
27.PETITION FOR REVIEW RULE 42
28.PETITION FOR REVIEW RULE 43
29.PETITION FOR REVIEW CERTIORARI RULE 45
30.PETITION FOR REVIEW RULE 46