This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
COURT OF APPEALS
LINDA LISTON and EVANGELINE SANCHEZ, Plaintiffs-Appellees, - Versus – JOSE ARRANGUEZ, SPOUSES JUNIE LEE and TERESITA LEE, and MICHAEL LEE, Defendants-Appellees, ADELNA ARRANGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. X------------/ CA G.R. CEB-CV No. 02969
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, by counsel, most respectfully moves for reconsideration of the Decision, promulgated on May 12 2011 and received by the undersigned counsel on 25 May 2011, and in support thereof, states: THAT THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN APPLYING SECTIONS 416 and 417 OF R.A. 71601 IN THE INSTANT CASE. THAT THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE MATTER OF
The New Local Government Act of 1991
02969. to wit: THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN GIVING CREDENCE TO THE SIMULATED AMICABLE SETTLEMENT AND IN UPHOLDING THE FICTITIOUS CLAIM OF PLAINTIFF LINDA LISTON AGAINST DEFENDANT-APPELLANT ADELNA ARRANGUEZ. plaintiffs-appellees had sufficiently established. their claim that defendant-appellant Adelna is liable on her obligation stated in the amicable settlement. After a careful examination of the parties’ respective stand. in relation to Article 20373. page 9 2|Page . THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN DISREGARDING THE RULE ON PERMISSIVE JOINDER OF PARTIES IN SO FAR AS THE CLAIMS OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE EVANGELINE SANCHEZ IS CONCERNED. 2. with preponderance of evidence. 71602. Decision. in relation to Article 2037 of the Civil Code. No. We hold that pursuant to Sections 416 and 417 of RA 7160 (The New Local Government Code of 1991). 1. At the outset it must be recalled that defendant-appellant raised the following assignments of error in her Appeal Brief.4 2 3 4 The Local Government Code of 1991 The New Civil Code of the Philippines CA-G. as legal basis of Its ruling. CV.MISJOINDER OF PARTIES IS A NON-ISSUE ON APPEAL.A. The Honorable Court of Appeals resolved the first assigned error by affirming the findings of the Trial Court and citing Sections 416 and 417 of R.R.
TERESA O. explained that . ESCUETA. 2003].. the proceedings are covered by the Local Government Code and the Katarungang Pambarangay Implementing Rules and Regulations. Firstly. because the said provisions of law does not squarely apply to the instant case.- 3|Page . namely. in MA. ESCUETA. 156228. we take exception to both factual and legal basis cited by this Honorable Court.R. [G. the Supreme Court En Banc. Thus. ET AL. Under the first remedy. The cause of action is the amicable settlement itself. which. TERESA VIDAL. No. While under the second remedy. (a) by execution of the Punong Barangay which is quasijudicial and summary in nature on mere motion of the party entitled thereto.MA. -versus. and (b) by an action in regular form. the proceedings are governed by the Rules of Court. 7160 provides for the mechanism of enforcing a settlement of the parties before the Lupon. has the force and effect of a final judgment.REPRESENTED BY HERMAN O..With all due respect. which remedy is judicial. Sections 416 and 417 of R.A. by operation of law. December 10. as amended. It provides for a two-tiered mode of enforcement of an amicable settlement executed by the parties before the Lupon.
7160 does not apply anymore. After the lapse of such time. Having done so. Sections 416 and 417 of R. and if the settlement is not so enforced by the Lupon after the lapse of the said period. Therefore. and the relief prayed for therein. 7160 which must be filed only in the proper city or municipal court. 417. the settlement may be enforced by action in the proper city or municipal court. an action for the enforcement of the settlement should be instituted in the proper municipal or city court.) It must be noted that the kind of action filed by plaintiffs in the trial court below is not the kind of remedy mandated in Section 417 of R. this being an ordinary civil action.A. chan robles virtual law library By express provision of Section 417 of the LGC.The amicable settlement or arbitration award may be enforced by execution by the Lupon within six (6) months from the date of the settlement.A. Execution. it may be enforced only by an action in the proper city or municipal court as provided for in Section 417 of the Local Government Code of 1991. the cause of action herein is no longer the Amicable Settlement. which reads:chan robles virtual law library Sec. as amended. Instead.The amicable settlement which is not repudiated within the period therefor may be enforced by execution by the Lupon through the Punong Barangay within a time line of six months. (Emphasis supplied. 4|Page . but the sum of money which is collectible from defendant-appellant. This is regardless of the nature of the complaint before the Lupon. plaintiffs opted for an ordinary civil action for the recovery of sum of money before the Regional Trial Court.
Cards) were not in the name of Adelna Arranguez. exception to With all due deference maintained. Therefore. As earlier explained. plaintiffs-appellees failed to prove the authenticity and due execution of the Amicable Settlement 5|Page . But regrettably.O. but an ordinary civil action for recovery of sum of money. with preponderance of evidence. plaintiff-appellee Linda Liston failed to explain why most of the Purchase Order Cards (P. The said P.Secondly. their claim that defendant-appellant Adelna Arranguez is liable on her obligation stated in the amicable settlement. As previously argued. plaintiff is charging defendant for another man’s account. plaintiff failed to explain why the same should be charged against defendant Adelna Arranguez. we take the conclusion that plaintiffs-appellees had sufficiently established.O. In fact. proof of the alleged indebtedness becomes necessary in the instant case because this is not one for execution of the barangay amicable settlement. because plaintiffs-appellees failed to prove the alleged indebtedness of defendant-appellant Adelna Arranguez. Thirdly. Cards were in the name of other persons. plaintiffs-appellees must prove the alleged indebtedness that gave rise to the recoverable amount. as a matter of burden of evidence. In other words.
Court of Appeals. 304 SCRA 632. Hence. [Salva vs.. right from the very inception. et al. as a consequence of such specific denials. Thus. in civil cases. it was incumbent upon the plaintiffs to prove the material allegation of fact stated in its complaint. Proof of authenticity and due execution becomes necessary under the given circumstances that the said amicable settlement was not enforced in accordance with Section 417 of R. “Plaintiff must therefore establish his case by a preponderance of evidence. i. the burden of proof rests on the party who would be defeated if no evidence is given on either side. In other words.against the assertion of defendant-appellant that it was a simulated document. 645 (1999)]. and hence. As a matter of fact. the party who alleges a fact has the burden of 6|Page . But having failed to do so.e. affirmative allegations. plaintiff should be deemed unable to discharge the requisite quantum of evidence.A. and affirmative defenses. Well-settled is the rule that “allegations can never be considered as repositories of truth. evidence as a whole which is superior to that of the defendant. 7160. defendantappellant already denied specifically each and every material allegations of the complaint on top of her affirmative allegations and affirmative defenses.. cannot serve as foundations for decisions resolving rights of litigants”.
PRAYER W H E R E F O R E. . 253 SCRA 641 (1996). And FINALLY. being a jurisdictional issue. the Honorable Court of appeals erred in holding that the matter of misjoinder of plaintiff-appellee Misjoinder of a Evangeline Sanchez is a non-issue on appeal.. . plaintiffs-appellees failed to prove their case by preponderance of evidence.. Court of Appeals.. et al. and. even for the first time on appeal. Trans-Pacific Supplies. 206 (1998) citing Summa Insurance Corporation vs. 288 SCRA 197. Other just and equitable reliefs under the circumstances are also prayed for. party boils down to the jurisdiction of the Court. Mandaue City [for Cebu City]. a new one be rendered DISMISSING the complaint in the Trial Court below for failure to prove plaintiffs’ cause of action. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. it can be raised anytime.” [Pacific Banking Corporation Employees Organization vs. Inc. . it is most respectfully prayed that the Honorable Court reconsiders Its Decision of May 12 2011. et al. and in lieu thereof. X x x x x . et al. 235 SCRA 494 (1994)].proving it. Philippines. Hence. Court of Appeals. In sum. vs. 7|Page . Court of Appeals.
and if I should learn hereafter that a similar action or proceeding is pending or has been filed in the Supreme Court. M. tribunal or agency. 799537 * Bohol Chapter * Dec. AHAT Counsel for Defendant-Appellant Attorney's Roll No. 2010 #8 Osmena Village.S. 05. and to the best of my knowledge. tribunals or agency. 42349 MCLE Compliance No. I am the defendant-appellant in the above-captioned case. I have hereunto affixed my signature on this _____ day of JUNE 2011. VERIFICATION I. III-0004165 * July 13. Filipino. the Court of Appeals. at Mandaue City. I have caused the preparation of the foregoing Motion For Reconsideration. Cebu City. 6014 Mandaue City Email: attyahat@yahoo. That I hereby certify that I have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving the same or similar issues. the Court of Appeals. As such. 0187958 * Mandaue City * Jan. 2009 PTR No. depose and say: That --1. resident of Camputhaw. ADELNA ARRANGUEZ 8|Page . of legal age. or in any other court. or in any other court. the Court of Appeals. the contents of which I have read and understood. 28. subscribing under oath. or any other court. 2011 IBP No. no such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court.08 June 2011 NILO G. 2.com Tel No: 354-8338 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES) CITY OF MANDAUE ) S. Philippines. ADELNA ARRANGUEZ. I hereby undertake to report that fact to this Honorable Court wherein this sworn certification have been filed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. L. and are true and correct of my own knowledge and based on authentic records. tribunal or agency. in the Supreme Court. Quezon Avenue Maguikay.
Cherry Court. _______. PRESIDING JUDGE RTC Branch 57 C. Gen.I. No. Cebu Holdings Center Cebu Business Park 6000 Cebu City BY PERSONAL SERVICE: Hon. ALVAREZ BY PERSONAL SERVICE: Counsel for DefendantsAppellees 9th Floor.D. Book No. Philippines. DEOLITO L. Maxilom Avenue 6000 Cebu City Atty.J. No. BY PERSONAL SERVICE: VALENCIA Counsel for PlaintiffsAppellees Room 308. _______. Fernan Palace of Justice 9|Page . _______. Series of 2 0 1 1 Copy furnished: Atty. BONIFACIO L. Doc. Page No. _______________________ SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this ____th of JUNE 2011 in Mandaue City.
in the following mode. 6000 Cebu City REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) IN THE CITY OF MANDAUE ) S. VALENCIA Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellees Room 308. Gen. I have hereunto affixed my signature on this 9th day of June 2011 in Mandaue City. ALVAREZ BY PERSONAL SERVICE: Counsel for DefendantsAppellees 9th Floor. to wit: Atty. specifically on the service of pleadings. PRESIDING JUDGE RTC Branch 57 C. Cebu Holdings Center Cebu Business Park 6000 Cebu City BY PERSONAL SERVICE: Hon. 6000 Cebu City IN WITNESS WHEREOF. Philippines.S. under oath. Fernan Palace of Justice Capitol. OMOLON. Cherry Court. Maxilom Avenue 6000 Cebu City BY PERSONAL SERVICE: Atty. ROEL O. OMOLON Affiant SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this ____TH 2011 in Mandaue City. in the above-captioned case. DEOLITO L. of legal age. 10 | P a g e day of June .J. I served a copy of the MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. Philippines.Capitol. BONIFACIO L. ROEL O. to each of the following parties. JUSTIFICATION/AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I. depose and state: That in order to comply with the requirements of the Rules Of Court.
_______.Doc. Book No. Series of 2 0 1 1 11 | P a g e . _______. No. _______. Page No.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.