POBRE V.

SUNTAY Unlawful Detainer and Grave Threats Preliminary Conference Stage Facts: Defendant Wryan Gomez Suntay grandson of the Plaintiffs sister Nora Pobre Gomez *while Nora P.Gomez was still alive, she requested Georgie Pobre, to let her daughter Jacqueline Gomez-Suntay, together with her 3 children (including Wryan Suntay) to occupy a portion of the house owned by their parents Urbano J.Pobre Nora Gomez 1. The plaintiff filed a case of Unlawful Detainer against the defendant on the basis that the property was sold on by their parents to the plaintiff. 2. The plaintiff sent a demand letter and a complaint to the barangay for eviction and also due to the grave threats made by him against the plaintiff 3. That on account of the refusal to vacate the subject property and his continued use and enjoyment thereof, the defendant should be held liable for 10,000 per month for the use and enjoyment of the property 4. The defendant prays that the case be dismissed as the subject property is registered in the name of Urbano J.Pobre and Pacora R.Pobre parents of Defendants grandmother, Nora Pobre Gomez. 5. As far as defendants knowledge and concern, the subject property was not sold to Plaintiff and, granting but not admitting, that the Deed of Absolute Sale exist, the same is fictitious and the same can no longer be registered/has prescribed at the lapse of 30years. 6. The defendant contends that he is not liable for any compensation of the subject premises to plaintiff as the same is owned by his mothers Jacqueline Suntay, parents, Urbano J.Pobre and Pacora R. Pobre, and his stay is legitimate being legitimate being the great grandson and said premises is their ancestral home. Issues to be tried and resolved: 1. Whether or not plaintiff is entitled to the physical possession and enjoyment thereof 2. Whether or not plaintiff has the right to evict defendant from the subject property. 3. Whether or not the defendant can be held liable for the cost of suit, attorneys fees lititgation expenses, payment of rental for the period of time defendant unjustly refused to vacate the subject premises.

PEOPLE V. CUERPO Arbitrary/Illegal Detention Presentation of Evidences Facts: 1. Complainant is currently a municipal employee of San Mateo, Rizal working as an electrician in the Engineering Department of said Municipality. 2. that on March 26, 2008 , he received a telephone call from the Municipal Electrician of the Municipality of San Mateo directing him to go the Municipal Hall of San Mateo since they will be doing something. complied with the directive, he proceeded to Municipal Hall 3. Enroute to Montalban they stopped in front of the Monterock at Brgy. Guinayang where several policemen and a mobil were waiting they were told that they will be cutting some power lines at Montalban and that they will be accompanying them. 4. while complainant was complying with the directive, ABC President of the Municipality of Montalban (Rodrgiuez) came and ordered him to desist from cutting the power lines leading to the municipal hall. 5. they were brought to the office of Mayor Cuerpo Mayor Cuerpo was under preventive suspension at that time. 6. he was interrogated as to who ordered him to cut the power lines - he was told that he would be detained inside the municipal hall until he tells the truth 7. that he was detained for 15 hours from 8pm to 1:30 pm 8. Respondent Mayor Cuerpo declared that complainant was caught in flagrante delicto which makes his arrest and detention lawful. 9. that the said complainant who was an employee in the Municipality of San Mateo has no business cutting of power in the Municipality of Rodriguez. 10. the respondent did not deny the Memorandum issued by the Chief of Police of the Municipality of Rodriguez requesting local custody of the complainant in fact, he turned over the complainant to the police station on the day the memorandum was send to his office. Issue(s) to be resolved: Whether the respondent can be held liable for arbitrary/illegal detention