Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Legal Forms PDF
Legal Forms PDF
PART ONE:
PLEADINGS AND
OTHER LEGAL DOCUMENTS IN
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Updated 2003. This Form Book was first created in 1999 by Professor Theodore O. Te, upon
suggestion of and specifically for use by the 1999 Bar Candidates of the U.P. College of Law. It was
later updated in 2000, which contained, for the first time, some checklists prepared by Atty. Alexes
M. Enriquez (a former Supervising Lawyer of the U.P. Office of Legal Aid) for Atty. Enriquezs lecture
during the Annual OLA Trial Techniques Seminar (Summer 2000; Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, Director) and
some which Professor Te uses in his own practice. This latest update is a slightly modified version of
the 2000 edition, with new forms made necessary by the 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure and other
pertinent laws. Some new forms have been made necessary by new Supreme Court rules such
as the Rule on Provisional Orders (AM No. 02-11-12-SC).
**
Assistant Professor, U.P. College of Law; Managing Partner, Sanidad Abaya Te Viterbo Enriquez
& Tan; Bachelor of Laws, University of the Philippines (1990); Regional Coordinator, Free Legal
Assistance Group (FLAG) (2000-present); Supervising Attorney, U.P. Office of Legal Aid (1998-2000;
2002);
1
Cf. Rules 6, 7 and 8, 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure;
2
A new requirement specifically provided under Rule 7, section 2(d).
3
Significant amendment introduced by 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure; cf. Rule 7, section 3.
4
Take note that under Rule 7, section 4, a verification based on information and belief or upon
knowledge, information and belief is considered defective and the pleading unverified.
Republic of thePhilippines
versus -
YOKO NGA,
Defendant.
x ----------------------------------- x
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Plaintiff is a foreign corporation organized and existing under the laws of France
with business address at 111 Ocean Drive, Tuna Compound, Quezon City; Defendant is a
Filipino, of legal age, single and currently resident of 112 Ocean Drive, Tuna Compound,
Quezon City, where he may be served with summons and other pertinent processes.
2. Plaintiff owns that property located at 112 Ocean Drive, Tuna Compound, Quezon
City which it leased to defendant under the terms and conditions stated in the Contract of Lease
dated 1 January 1995, which contract expires on 31 December 1996. A copy of the contract
is attached as ANNEX A.
3. Upon expiration of the contract, plaintiff informed defendant of its intention not to
renew the lease as it would use the property for its business expansion; plaintiff then asked
defendant to vacate the premises. A copy of plaintiffs letter to defendant is attached as
ANNEX B.
4. Despite demand duly made and received, defendant has refused to vacate the
premises and continues to occupy the property without plaintiffs consent. Resort to the
Barangay conciliation system proved useless as defendant refused to appear before the Lupong
Tagapamayapa. A Certification to File Action is attached as ANNEX C.5
5. Defendants act of dispossession has caused plaintiff to suffer material injury
because plaintiffs business expansion plans could not be implemented despite the arrival of
machineries specifically leased for this purpose at the rental rate of US$500 per month.
Defendants continued occupation of the premises has also forced plaintiff to sue and to incur
legal expenses amounting to Fifty Thousand Pesos (PHP50,000.00).
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays for judgment in its favor by ordering defendant
to vacate the property and peacefully turn over possession to plaintiff and for defendant to pay
plaintiff the amount of US$3,500 representing rentals on the machineries for seven (7) months
and Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) for Attorneys fees.
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
Quezon City; _________________
(SGD.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
Please note that this particular allegation may actually be unnecessary considering the facts
given and that the plaintiff is a juridical person. It is included in this complaint simply for educational
purposes as a representative allegation of this fact.
Page 2 of 62
versus -
MANGGA GANTSO,
Defendant.
x -------------------------- x
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Plaintiff is a Filipino, of legal age, and resident of 6750 Forbes Park, Makati City;
defendant is also a Filipino, of legal age and resident of 6752, Forbes Park, Makati City, where
he may be served with summons and other processes.
2. Sometime in January 1996 and over a period of six (6) months, defendant borrowed
certain amounts from plaintiff. Defendant promised to pay these amounts on an installment
basis monthly. These amounts now total Nine Hundred Thousand Pesos (P900,000.00).
3. Despite repeated demands, both oral and written, defendant failed or has refused to
pay any amount to plaintiff as no installment payment has even been made. A copy each of
plaintiffs two (2) demand letters is attached as ANNEX A and B.
4. Resort to the Baranggay Conciliation process proved fruitless as defendant failed to
appear, despite notice on him to appear. Thus, a Certification to File Action, a copy of which is
attached as ANNEX C, was issued by the Baranggay Chairman.
The highlighted and bracketed portion is a JURAT; this accompanies any notarized document
that is declaratory in nature, as opposed to a notarized document that transmits rights or property, which
must be accompanied by an ACKNOWLEDGMENT. Note that if the document is subscribed before a
public officer duly authorized to take oaths, then there is no need for the affiant to produce a CTC nor for
the entry into a Notarial Register; thus, the italicized portion of the JURAT is dispensed with but not the
oath itself.
7
1978 Bar Question;
Page 3 of 62
[5. Defendants obligation is due and demandable and plaintiff is entitled to the
payment of the entire amount of Nine Hundred Thousand Pesos (P900,000.00) plus legal
interest.
6. By reason of defendants unreasonable failure or refusal to pay his due and
demandable obligation, plaintiff was forced to engage the services of counsel to vindicate his
rights thereby committing himself to pay legal expenses amounting to Fifty Thousand Pesos
(P50,000.00).
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays for judgment in his favor through a Decision
directing defendant to pay him NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P900,000.00), with legal
interest, as ACTUAL DAMAGES and FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00) as Attorneys
Fees.]8
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
Quezon City for Makati; ______________.
(SGD.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]
Add: Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping
C. COMPLAINT FOR REPLEVIN9
Republic of the Philippines
Regional Trial Court
National Capital Judicial Region
Branch 101-Makati City
HURTS RENT-A-CAR,
represented by AKIN NAYAN,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 000088
-
versus -
YOKO NGA,
Defendant.
x----------------------------------- x
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Plaintiff is the general manager of Hurts Rent-A-Car with offices at Makati City;
defendant is a Tongan, temporarily residing at Bayview Hotel, Roxas Boulevard, Manila.
2. Hurts Rent-A-Car is the registered owner of a Honda CRV with license plate number
TUV-675, which defendant, on 3 March 1999, rented from plaintiff for a period of one (1) week.
3. On 15 March 1999, plaintiff demanded from defendant the return of the car but
defendant failed and refused to do so.
4. The car has not been taken for a tax assessment or a fine pursuant to law nor has it
been seized on execution or attachment. Its present value is approximately Nine Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P900,000.00).
5. Plaintiff is ready, willing and able to give bond in defendants name in double the
value of the property for the return of the property to defendant should that be adjudged or for
the payment of such sum that defendant may recover from plaintiff in this action.
8
Please note that the bracketed and italicized portion is indispensable to the filing of a Complaint
as it is required that every Complaint state in the body as well as in the prayer the amount of damages
sought. This is jurisdictional and a complaint that fails to comply with this requirement is fatally defective.
9
1986 Bar Question;
Page 4 of 62
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that the writ of replevin issue directing the
Sheriff or any other authorized officer to take possession of the car and dispose of it in
accordance with the Rules of Court and, after hearing, judgment be rendered declaring plaintiff
to be lawfully entitled to the possession of the car and sentencing defendant to pay its value.
Quezon City for Makati City; ________________.
(SGD.) MITCH MCDEERE
Add: Verification and Certification of Non-Forum Shopping
D. COMPLAINT TO SET PERIOD OF YEARS FOR LEASE10
Republic of the Philippines
Regional Trial Court
National Capital Judicial Region
Pasig City-Branch 161
NANG UUPA,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 00111
-
versus -
NAGPA PAUPA,
Defendant.
x ---------------------- x
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Plaintiff and Defendant are both Filipino citizens and of legal age; plaintiff resides at
1-A, Cruz Street, Pasig City while defendant resides at 2 Frisco Street, Pasig City, where he
may be served with summons.
2. On 1 January 1996, defendant leased to plaintiff the premises at 1-A Cruz Street,
Pasig City for a monthly rental of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) to be paid within the first
five (5) days of each month.
3. There is no fixed period for the lease agreement except that rentals are to be paid by
the month.
4. Plaintiff has been paying the rentals as they fall due each month, without fail.
However, on 4 April 1999, defendant gave notice to plaintiff that he is terminating the lease
agreement by the end of August 1999.
5. Considering that the period of lease has not been fixed, this Honorable Court may fix
a longer period of time as the lessee has been occupying the place for a period of three (3)
years. A period of two (2) years is reasonable considering that the lessee has no place to
transfer to immediately and that he has introduced substantial improvements to the premises
amounting to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00).
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that this Honorable Court fix a period of years for
the lease between plaintiff and defendant.
Quezon City for Pasig City; 6 August 2002.
(SGD.) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]
Add: Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping
COUNTERCLAIM11
I. CHECKLIST OF REQUIREMENTS:
Caption
Denials/Admissions12
Statement of Affirmative Allegations
Statement of Affirmative/Negative Defenses13
Counterclaim or Crossclaim14
Prayer/Reliefs
Date/Place of Execution
Signature of Counsel
Verification
Certification Against Forum Shopping
Proof of Service
II. SAMPLE/REPRESENTATIVE FORMS
A. ANSWER WITH COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
Regional Trial Court
National Capital Judicial Region
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
Branch 33, Quezon City
ALIS DI-YAN COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 2222
-
YOKO NGA,
Defendant.
x ----------------------------------- x
ANSWER
(With COUNTERCLAIM)
DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully states that:
11
Page 6 of 62
Admissions/Denials
1. He admits the contents of paragraph 1 only insofar as his personal circumstances
but specifically denies the contents insofar as plaintiffs personal circumstances for the reason
stated in the Affirmative Defenses below.
2. He admits the contents of paragraph 2 only where it states that a Contract of Lease
was entered into but specifically denies that the Contract reflects the true intent of the parties as
explained in the Affirmative Defenses below.
3. He admits the contents of paragraph 3 only as to the fact that demand to vacate was
made but specifically denies its contents as to the truth of the reasons for the letter for lack of
knowledge sufficient to form a reasonable belief as to its truth or falseness..
4. He specifically denies the contents of paragraphs 4 to 6 for the reasons stated in the
Affirmative Defenses below.
Affirmative Defenses
5. Defendant reiterates, repleads and incorporates by reference all the foregoing
insofar as they are material and additionally submit that the Complaint should be dismissed
because:
5.1. Plaintiff has no capacity to sue as it is a foreign corporation doing
business in the Philippines without a license.
5.2. The Complaint fails to state a cause of action as the Contract of
Lease (ANNEX A) was, before its expiration, superceded by a Deed of Absolute
Sale whereby plaintiff sold to defendant the parcel of land in question, a copy of
which is attached as ANNEX 1.
Counterclaim
6. Defendant reiterates, repleads and incorporates by reference all the foregoing
insofar as they are material and additionally submit that he is entitled to reliefs arising from the
filing of this malicious and baseless suit, as follows:
6.1. Moral Damages amounting to One Million Pesos
(PHP1,000,000/00) because his name and reputation were besmirched by this
malicious and baseless suit.
6.2. Attorneys Fees amounting to One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00) because he was compelled to secure services of counsel to
vindicate his legal rights.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully prays that judgment be rendered in his favor by
dismissing the Complaint and granting defendants counterclaim by awarding defendant: (a)
One Million Pesos as Moral Damages, and (b) Fifty Thousand as Attorneys Fees.
Other just and equitable reliefs are prayed for.
Quezon City; __________________.
(SGD) MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Defendant
VERIFICATION & CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING15
I, YOKO NGA, of legal age, do hereby state that: I am the defendant in the case filed by
Alis Di-yan Company for ejectment; in response, I have caused the preparation of this Answer
15
Please note that Rule 7, section 5 of the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure requires that any
initiatory pleading, among which is a counterclaim, must be accompanied by a Certification
against Forum Shopping. Also please note that an Answer need not be verified but if there is a
specific denial of an actionable document, such as that contained in italics above, then the
Answer must be verified. See again Rule 8, secs. 7 (definition of actionable document), 8 (how to
contest such documents), 10 (requirements of a specific denial), 11 (effects of failure to specifically deny).
Page 7 of 62
with Counterclaim; I have read its contents and affirm that they are true and correct to the best
of my own personal knowledge; I specifically deny the genuineness and due execution as
well as the binding effect of the actionable documents pleaded by plaintiiff;16 I hereby
certify that there is no other case commenced or pending before any court involving the same
parties and the same issue and that, should I learn of such a case, I shall notify the court
within five (5) days from my notice.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument on 27 July 2002.
(Sgd) YOKO NGA
JURAT
B. ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM AND CROSSCLAIM
See Form No. 2-A, supra, but add-Crossclaim
7. Defendant reiterates, repleads and incorporates by reference all the foregoing
insofar as they are material and additionally submit that he is entitled to indemnity and/or
contribution from co-defendant MANGGA GANTSO in the event that he is made liable to plaintiff
because co-defendant MANGGA GANTSO acted as the duly authorized agent of plaintiff in the
sale of the property and, acting as such, received consideration, in the form of the purchase
price, from defendant.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully prays that judgment be rendered in his favor by
dismissing the Complaint and granting defendants counterclaim by awarding defendant: (a)
One Million Pesos as Moral Damages, and (b) Fifty Thousand as Attorneys Fees. In the event
that defendant is made liable to plaintiff on the Complaint, he further prays that co-defendant
MANGGA GANTSO be made liable to indemnify defendant in the same amount under the
Crossclaim.
16
Representative specific denial under oath, as required by the Rules, in relation to any actionable
document;
17
Rule 18, section 6;
Page 8 of 62
versus -
LAKISA HIRAP,
Defendant.
x ------------------------------------- x
PRE-TRIAL BRIEF18
DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully submits her Pre-Trial Brief, as follows:
I. WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO AN AMICABLE SETTLEMENT
AND POSSIBLE TERMS OF ANY SUCH SETTLEMENT19
1.1. Subject to a concrete proposal that is fair and reasonable and a reciprocal
manifestation of openness from plaintiff, defendant is open to the possibility of amicably settling
this dispute.
1.2. Pursuant to Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, defendant respectfully
submits that the desired terms of any amicable settlement would involve, first, a clarification of
the actual extent of any obligation due and owing to plaintiff inasmuch as there is nothing to
indicate defendants obligations to plaintiff and, second, a schedule of payments.
II. BRIEF STATEMENT OF CLAIMS AND DEFENSES
2.1. Plaintiff seeks principally to recover the amount of Twenty Two Million Eight
Hundred Eighteen Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Eight Pesos and Thirty Centavos
(PHP22,818,948.30) with interest at twelve percent (12%) arising allegedly from unpaid orders
delivered to defendant variously in 1989.
2.2. Defendant resists plaintiffs claims based on a failure to state a cause of action
because of :
2.2.1. Plaintiffs lack of personality to sue and, therefore, not being the
real party in interest under Rule 3, section 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure;
2.2.2. Extinguishment of the alleged claim made by the entity Regency
Furniture.
2.3. Defendant also interposed a compulsory counterclaim for Two Million Pesos
(PHP2,000,000.00) for moral damages and Two Million Pesos (PHP2,000,000.00) for
exemplary damages and One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PHP100,000.00) as attorneys fees.
Please note that there is no need to attach a Notice of Hearing for a Pre-Trial Brief. Please note
also that pre-trial is now mandatory in criminal cases under Rule 118, 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure
as well as under RA 8493 (The Speedy Trial Act) although neither the law nor the Rules require the
submission of a Pre-Trial Brief in criminal cases (in practice, courts also do not require the submission of
a pre-trial brief in criminal cases). Consequently, the requirement of a pre-trial brief and the
consequences for failure to submit one (e.g., non-suit or dismissal) appear to pertain exclusively to civil
cases.
19
This is a new requirement imposed by the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure.
Page 9 of 62
3.1. Defendant admits only those facts stated in her Answer, i.e., her personal
circumstances, receipt of the demand letter dated January 5, 1997 and her reply to the demand
letter.
3.2. Subject to a concrete proposal for stipulation of additional facts from plaintiff during
pre-trial or even thereafter, defendant admits no other facts stated in the Complaint.
IV. ISSUES TO BE TRIED
4.1. Defendant submits that the following issues put forward by plaintiff are subject to
proof:
4.1.1. Plaintiffs personality to seek legal reliefs;
4.1.2. Plaintiffs entitlement to the amount claimed;
4.2. Defendant submits that the following issues she put forward are subject to proof:
4.2.1. Plaintiffs bad faith in filing this suit;
4.2.2. Defendants entitlement to the claims made in her Compulsory
Counterclaim as a result of plaintiffs bad faith;
V. EVIDENCE
5.1. Defendant intends to present the following witnesses:
5.1.1. Defendant herself, who will testify on the true circumstances
leading to the filing of this suit against her;
5.1.2. An employee of Topless Enterprises with personal knowledge as
to the true circumstances behind the alleged obligations due and owing in favor
of plaintiff.
5.2. Defendant reserves the right to present any and all documentary evidence which
shall become relevant to rebut plaintiffs claims in the course of trial as well as any other
witnesses whose testimony will become relevant to belie plaintiffs witnesses, if necessary.
VI. RESORT TO DISCOVERY
6.1. Considering the relatively simple issues presented, defendant does not intend to
avail of discovery at this time.
6.2. Subject, however, to a concrete and reasonable request for discovery from
plaintiff, defendant reserves the right to resort to discovery before trial.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 14 April 2002.
Copy furnished:
ATTY. MA BOLA
Counsel for Plaintiff
Page 10 of 62
Page 11 of 62
versus -
DAMI LUPA,
Respondent.
x ------------------------------------ x
MOTION26 FOR LEAVE
OF COURT TO FILE REPLY WITH
MOTION TO ADMIT ATTACHED REPLY27
PETITIONER, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Petitioner received a copy of respondents Comment to his petition on 3 January
1999. The Comment contains several allegations of fact and misinterpretations of the record
that may mislead the court and need to be corrected. For this reason, petitioner intends to file
a Reply.
2. Under existing rules, a Reply can no longer be filed as a matter of course.
Consequently, petitioner seeks leave of this Court to file the said Reply, a copy of which,
pursuant to the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure, is attached to this motion.
WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully prays that he be granted leave of court to file a
Reply and for the Court to admit the attached Reply.
Quezon City for Manila; 5 January 2000.
(SGD.) ATTICUS FINCH
EXPLANATION28
parte motions, it is sufficient that the request not contain a date, and for that purpose, the underlined
portion in the Request may be omitted with the Notice to opposing counsel simply stating that counsel
will submit the motion to the court for approval immediately upon receipt.
25
Cf. Rule 13, section 13;
26
In motions filed before the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, a Notice of Hearing is not
required.
27
Under Rule 15, sec. 9, 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure, a motion for leave to file a pleading or
motion shall be accompanied by the pleading or motion sought to be admitted.
28
The requirement is for a written explanation if service is done by registered mail instead of by
Page 12 of 62
The foregoing Motion and its attachment were served on Atty. Mitch McDeere by
registered mail instead of personal service as counsel for petitioner only has one messenger
and personal service would have resulted in the motion not being filed on time to the detriment
of petitioner.
(SGD.) ATTICUS FINCH
C. MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS29
LAKISA LAYAW,
Plaintiff,
-
versus -
LAKISA HIRAP,
Defendant.
x ------------------------------------- x
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
Plaintiiff, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. On 3 August 1998, plaintiff sued defendant for a sum of money in the amount of
Nine Hundred Thousand Pesos (P900,000.00).
2. In his Answer, defendant admitted the obligation and merely stated that he was
asking to be given an extension of time to pay his obligation but that plaintiff instead filed this
Complaint. The Answer admits the material allegations of the Complaint and has not tendered
any issue; consequently, a judgment on the pleadings may be rendered.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays a judgment on the pleadings be rendered in
his favor.
Quezon City; _________________.
(SGD.) MITCH MCDEERE
Request for and Notice of Hearing30
personal service; the explanation need not be verified, it being required only that it is signed. However,
in the Supreme Court, where an Affidavit of Service is required, it may be practical to combine the
Explanation and the Affidavit of Service. Cf. Rul;e 13, sections 11 and 13.
29
1989 Bar Question;
30
Please note that this is a litigious motion, i.e., it must be set for hearing. Thus, a specific hearing
date must be requested and notice thereof given to adverse party through counsel.
Page 13 of 62
versus -
LAKISA HIRAP,
Defendant.
x ------------------------------ x
EX PARTE MOTION TO SET CASE FOR PRE-TRIAL
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. On 1 June 1999, defendant submitted her Answer to the Complaint, thereby causing
the issues to be joined.
2. This case is, thus, ripe for pre-trial. Complying with Rule 18, section 1 of the 1997
Rules on Civil Procedure, plaintiff respectfully asks that this case be set for pre-trial.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that this case be set for pre-trial on a date
convenient to this Honorable Court.
Quezon City; 3 June 2000.
(SGD.) ATTICUS FINCH
REQUEST AND NOTICE32
THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT
Regional Trial Court
Branch 90, Quezon City
Please submit the foregoing to the Court for its approval immediately upon receipt
hereof.
MITCH MCDEERE, ESQ.
2 The Firm
Laguna Street, Quezon City
Please take notice that counsel has requested for the approval of the foregoing motion
immediately upon receipt.
ATTICUS FINCH
31
Under Rule 18, section 1 of the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure, it is now mandatory on the part of
the plaintiff to move ex parte for setting of pre-trial. Note that the motion is expressly denominated as ex
parte, i.e., no need for hearing.
32
Note the difference between this Request and Notice and that contained in Form No. 4A; this
does not contain a date of hearing because under Rule 15, section 4 of the 1997 Rules on Civil
Procedure, it is a motion which the Court may act upon without prejudicing the rights of the adverse
party and moreover because Rule 18, section 1 expressly defines this to be an ex parte motion.
Page 14 of 62
versus -
PASEN SYOSO,
Defendant.
x ------------------------------------ x
MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. This case is set for trial on 5 August 1999 at 8:30 in the morning.
2. On said date and time, the undersigned counsel will be unable to appear before this
Honorable Court as he has also been directed to appear on this date and time before the
Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 139 for People of the Philippines v. Bil Moko,
Criminal Case No. 009988, where he is scheduled to terminate cross-examination of the
prosecutions expert witness who will be available only on said date and time.
3. Without impugning the importance of these proceedings, plaintiff respectfully
submits that his attendance in the Makati case becomes indispensable; otherwise, the accused
in said case would be deprived of the opportunity to confront and cross-examine a vital witness
against her.
4. This motion is prompted only by the foregoing reason and not for delay.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that the trial scheduled on 5 August 1999 be
POSTPONED to another date convenient to this Honorable Court.
Quezon City; 30 July 1999.
MITCH MCDEERE
REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING34
F. MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
DILA TORY,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 008877
-
versus -
PASEN SYOSO,
Defendant.
x ------------------------------------ x
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. He has been directed to file a Reply to defendants Answer by 10 August 1999.
2. The undersigned counsel, however, anticipates his inability to file the Reply on or
before the said due date because of the tremendous pressure of other equally urgent
professional work requiring the preparation of pleadings and almost daily trial appearances
before the various courts within and outside Metro Manila. For this reason, the undersigned is
33
Page 15 of 62
constrained to ask for an additional fifteen (15) days from 10 August 1999, or until 25 August
1999, within which to submit plaintiffs Reply.
3. This motion is not intended for delay but is motivated only by the foregoing reason.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that he be granted an additional fifteen (15)
days from 10 August 1999, or until 25 August 1999, within which to submit plaintiffs Reply.
Quezon City; 1 August 1999.
MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Plaintiff
REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING
G. MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT
ANAKIN SKYWALKER,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 000909
-
versus -
PADME AMIDALA,
Defendant.
x ---------------------------------- x
MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Plaintiff filed this Complaint against defendant on 1 March 1999; summons were
served on defendant on 20 March 1999, as indicated by the Sheriffs Return of even date, a
copy of which is attached as ANNEX A.
2. Defendants reglementary period to file Answer ended on 5 April 1999; no motion for
extension of such period was filed nor was any granted motu propio by this Honorable Court.
Despite the lapse of time, defendant has failed to answer the Complaint against her; plaintiff is
entitled to a declaration of default and the right to present evidence ex parte against defendant.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that defendant be declared in default and that
plaintiff be allowed to present evidence ex parte before the Clerk of Court acting as
Commissioner.
Quezon City; 7 April 1999.
(SGD) DARTH SIDIOUS
Counsel for Plaintiff
REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING35
35
Please note that defendant is entitled to be notified of this motion and the order declaring him/her
in default; thereafter, defendant loses the right to receive any other notices except for judgment in default.
Page 16 of 62
versus -
PADME AMIDALA,
Defendant.
x ---------------------------------- x
MOTION TO LIFT ORDER OF DEFAULT
DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Five (5) days after service of summons and receipt of Complaint, she filed a Motion
to Dismiss on the ground that plaintiffs claim is outside the jurisdictional amount of this
Honorable Court under the new Expanded Jurisdiction Act and that the Complaint should
properly be filed and tried before the Metropolitan Trial Court. The Motion to Dismiss, which
was received by plaintiffs counsel on 25 March 1999, was set for hearing on 10 April 1999, as
indicated on the Request for and Notice of Hearing.
2. Without waiting for the hearing on the Motion to Dismiss, this Honorable Court
declared defendant in default on 7 April 1999 based solely on plaintiffs Motion, filed two (2)
days after the supposed lapse of the reglementary period, which, however, was tolled by the
filing of a Motion to Dismiss.
3. Under the circumstances, the order of default is premature and without legal and
factual basis as : (a) defendant has not failed to file an Answer within the reglementary period,
(b) the reglementary period has not lapsed because of the filing of the Motion to Dismiss within
the period, and (c) the pendency of the Motion to Dismiss is prejudicial to the issue of
defendants default. Consequently, the order of default should be lifted.
WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully prays that the Order of Default against her be
LIFTED and that this Honorable Court resolve her Motion to Dismiss.
Quezon City; 8 April 1999.
(SGD) OBI WAN KENOBI
Counsel for Defendant
REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING
subject of petition
All material portions of the record as would
support the petition39
II. SAMPLE/REPRESENTATIVE FORMS:
A. CERTIORARI (with Injunction and/or TRO)
(Caption and Title)
PETITION
PETITIONER, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. (State capacity of petitioner and respondent/s, citizenship, status and residence.)
2. (State the date on which copy of Decision was received and/or Resolution on Motion
for Reconsideration, if filed, denied.)
3. (State briefly the facts and circumstances under which the respondent/s exercising
judicial functions acted without, or in excess of, jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.)
4. (State entitlement to Injunction and/or TRO, i.e., [a] petitioner has a clear, legal right,
[b] which is threatened by an act or omission of respondents, [c] and that, unless restrained, will
cause grave and irreparable injury to petitioner. Allege also that petitioner is ready to post a
bond in an amount to be fixed by the Court conditioned upon the payment to respondents of any
damages suffered arising from the writ should petitioner be found not to be entitled to the writ.)
5. There is no appeal from such decision, nor any plain or adequate speedy remedy in
the ordinary course of law, except this petition.
6. A certified true copy (or duplicate original copy) of the Decision under review is
attached as ANNEX A.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that a writ of certiorari be issued ANNULLING
the (act, decision or finding) for being in grave abuse of discretion; in the interim, that a
preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order issue to ENJOIN any further
proceedings by respondents.
Quezon City; _________________
(SGD.) COUNSEL
VERIFICATION, CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
AND VERIFIED STATEMENT OF MATERIAL DATES40
39
Rule 65, section 6, par. 2 expressly makes Rule 56, section 2 applicable to petitions for
certiorari, mandamus and prohibition. Rule 56, section 2 provides that Rules 46, 48, 49, 51, 52 and 56
apply. Rule 46, section 3 provides that the petition must be accompanied not only by a certified true
copy of the judgment or order questioned but also by such material portions of the record as are
referred to therein, and other documents, relevant or pertinent thereto.
40
To the standard Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping, ADD the date when the
Decision or Judgment was received pursuant to the requirements under the Rules of Court.
Page 18 of 62
B. PROHIBITION
(Caption and Title)
PETITION
PETITIONER, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. (State capacity of petitioner and respondent/s, citizenship, status and residence.)
2. (If applicable, state the date on which copy of Decision was received and/or
Resolution on Motion for Reconsideration, if filed, denied.)
3. (State briefly the facts and circumstances under which the respondent/s whether
exercising judicial or ministerial functions acted without, or in excess of, jurisdiction or with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.)
4. (State entitlement to Injunction and/or TRO, i.e., [a] petitioner has a clear, legal right,
[b] which is threatened by an act or omission of respondents, [c] and that, unless restrained, will
cause grave and irreparable injury to petitioner. Allege also that petitioner is ready to post a
bond in an amount to be fixed by the Court conditioned upon the payment to respondents of any
damages suffered arising from the writ should petitioner be found not to be entitled to the writ.)
5. There is no appeal from such decision, nor any plain or adequate speedy remedy in
the ordinary course of law, except this petition.
6. A certified true copy (or duplicate original copy) of the Decision under review is
attached as ANNEX A.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that an injunction or TRO be issued directing
respondent/s to desist and refrain from further proceedings in the premises, and that after due
notice and hearing, a writ of prohibition issue directing respondent/s to desist absolute and
perpetually from further proceedings (in the said action or matter).
Quezon City; _________________
(SGD.) COUNSEL
VERIFICATION, CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
AND VERIFIED STATEMENT OF MATERIAL DATES41
C. MANDAMUS
(Caption and title)
PETITION
PETITIONER, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. (State the capacity of petitioner and respondent/s and their addresses.)
2. (State the facts and circumstances whereby respondent/s unlawfully neglected the
performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust
or station, or unlawfully excluded the petitioner from the enjoyment of a right or office to which
the petitioner is entitled.)
3. Petitioner has no appeal from such decision, nor any plain or adequate speedy
remedy in the ordinary course of law, except this petition.
41
To the standard Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping, ADD the date when the
Decision or Judgment was received pursuant to the requirements under the Rules of Court.
Page 19 of 62
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that, after due notice and hearing, a writ of
mandamus issue commanding respondent/s forthwith to: (state the act required to be done),
with costs against them.
Quezon City; ________________
(SGD.) COUNSEL
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
Rule 66;
Rule 62;
Rule 63;
Rule 66, section 2;
Rule 66, section 5;
Rule 66, section 6;
Rule 62, section 1;
Rule 63, sections 1 and 2;
Rule 66, section 6;
Rule 62, section 1;
Rule 63, section 1;
Page 20 of 62
Signature of Counsel
Verification
Certification Against Forum Shopping
II. SAMPLE/REPRESENTATIVE FORMS:
A. COMPLAINT IN INTERPLEADER53
NALI LITO,
Plaintiff,
SCA No. ____________
-
versus -
Rule 62;
It is important to allege this because otherwise plaintiff would be required to pay the docket fees
involved in filing the Complaint in Interpleader which would be determined by the value of the property.
In this way, plaintiff will not be unduly prejudiced by the costs of the suit.
55
Rule 63, sec. 1, par. 2;
54
Page 21 of 62
versus -
4. Unless declaratory relief is granted, plaintiff will suffer grave and irreparable injury
because he is unsure of the instances when he may lawfully use his cellular phone while in a
moving vehicle and when such use may lead to confiscation and a fine.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that this Honorable Court grant declaratory
relief and declare plaintiffs rights and duties under the Ordinance.
ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
Verification and Certification of Non-Forum Shopping
D. QUO WARRANTO
(Caption and title)
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:
1. (State the capacity and address of both plaintiff and defendant.)
2. (State fully and clearly the facts and circumstances showing that defendant is
unlawfully occupying a public office and that plaintiff is entitled to hold the same office.)
3. (State that plaintiff has demanded that defendant vacate said office and deliver it to
plaintiff but that defendant has unlawfully refused to do so.)
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that a writ of quo warranto issue ousting and
excluding defendant from occupying the office of ____________ and declare that plaintiff is
entitled to the said office and that he be placed forthwith in possession thereof.
(SGD) COUNSEL
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
Page 23 of 62
PART TWO:
PLEADINGS AND OTHER LEGAL
FORMS IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
)
)
s.s.
COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT
I, MA SELAN, of legal age, Filipino, and resident of 4 Privet Drive, Triple X Village,
Makati, do hereby state under oath that:
1. I am a member of the Triple X Village Homeowners Association (Association) and
was formerly a Director and Corporate Secretary of the Association.
2. I accuse and hereby charge MR. MA INGAY, residing at 5 Privet Drive, Triple X
Village, Makati, of violating Article 358 of the Revised Penal Code (Slander and Oral
Defamation), committed against me when he publicly, maliciously and deliberately uttered
defamatory remarks against me during the Board Meeting of the Association on April 27, 1998.
This is attested to by the following exchange that transpired between Mr. Ingay and the other
members of the Board in attendance:
(Quote Exchange)
Attached as ANNEX A is a copy of the official transcript of the meeting.
3. Prior resort to the Barangay conciliation system proved fruitless as Mr. Ingay did
not retract his remarks. Consequently, a Certification to File Action was issued by the
Barangay Chairperson, a copy of which is attached as ANNEX B.
4. There is no other person named Ma Selan residing at Triple X Village nor is there
any other person named Ma Selan who has acted as Board Member of the Association.
Consequently, Mr. Ingays public and defamatory utterance was clearly a reference to me and
to no other.
5. Mr. Ma Ingays remarks, calling me a swindler twice over, uttered in a public
meeting are clearly insulting and defamatory as they malign me and attribute to me a criminal
act, nature and predisposition. There is, moreover, no doubt that Mr. Ingays use of the word
swindled was deliberate as his explanation and clarification a few utterances thereafter would
show. Mr. Ingays remarks are also very serious as they cast aspersions on my reputation,
character and very person before my peers and fellow homeowners.
6. Mr. Ingays remarks have injured my name, reputation and character before my
57
Page 24 of 62
neighbors and peers. While my name, reputation and character are incapable of pecuniary
estimation as these are the result of a lifetimes effort to build a name, reputation and character
that my children and their children can be proud to bear, Mr. Ingay cannot be allowed to simply
go scot-free without bearing the consequences of his acts. For this reason, I am also holding
Mr. Ma Ingay liable civilly for defaming me in the amount of One Million Pesos
(P1,000,000.00) in nominal damages, Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) in
moral damages and Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) in exemplary damages.
TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, I have signed this Complaint-Affidavit on __
December 1998.
MA SELAN
Complainant-Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this ___ day of December 1998.
Investigating Prosecutor
CERTIFICATION
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY EXAMINED THE AFFIANT AND AM
SATISFIED THAT HE VOLUNTARILY EXECUTED AND UNDERSTOOD HIS AFFIDAVIT.
Investigating Prosecutor59
B. COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
Republic of the Philippines
The City of Makati
)
)
s.s.
COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
Re : I.S. No. 1613
4.3. On that day, Ms. Gulang brought the units to the Mayors Office;
she met with Mr. Gantso inside the Mayors office. They transacted business
inside the Mayors Office and only passed by my office on their way out.
4.4. Some time after that, Ms. Gulang phoned me and told me that Mr.
Gantso had not paid her the amount of P11,000.00 for the units. Somewhat
embarrassed by this, I called Mr. Gantso and told him to pay Ms. Gulang; he
assured me that he would pay her but that he just needed to collect money from
the rest of the group.
4.5. After persistent calls from Ms. Gulang telling me that Mr. Gantso
had not yet paid, I gave her the telephone number of Gantso so that she could
just call him directly. But even then, I would still get calls from Ms. Gulang; and
when she started to get angry over the telephone, I set up an appointment for Mr.
Gantso to meet with her at the Office.
4.6. Thereafter, I would still receive phone calls telling me that Mr.
Gantso had yet to pay; I would follow up with Mr. Gantso but he simply gave me
this promise that he would pay.
5. It is utterly inexplicable that Ms. Gulang would hold me liable for estafa when all
that I did was to refer Ms. Gulang to Mr. Gantso; to a certain extent, I even exerted my best
efforts to see that Ms. Gulang was paid due simply to my great embarrassment at the prospect
of being accused of referring a person who does not know how to pay for an obligation.
6. For this reason, it is certainly incomprehensible that I should stand accused of estafa
by Ms. Gulang. I performed no act of deceit or fraud against her in ordering the units.
I performed NO ACT that even remotely resembles ANY of the acts punished under
Article 315. If at all, any cause of action is PURELY CIVIL in nature and that liability does not
pertain to my personal account in the absence of a showing that I benefitted from the Nextel
units (which Ms. Gulang does not even allege and cannot prove); any civil liability should
pertain to the Office of the Mayor, not to me.
7. Considering the foregoing, I respectfully submit that there is no prima facie basis to
conclude that the crime of Estafa or that any crime at all has been committed. The Complaint
against me should, thus, be dismissed.
TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, I have signed this Statement on 3 February
2000.
(SGD) MA LABO
(*) Verification
(**) Certification
Page 26 of 62
60
Page 27 of 62
versus -
PI KUTIN,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------- x
INFORMATION
The Undersigned accuses PI KUTIN of the crime of Bigamy, committed as follows:
That on or about 3 July 1998, in the City of Quezon and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, being then legally married
to BIL MOKO, and without such marriage having been legally dissolved and thus
valid and existing, did wilfully, unlawfully and felicitously contract a second
marriage with ASA WA in the City of Quezon.
CONTRARY TO LAW.76
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
CERTIFICATE OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION77
I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation in this case was conducted by me in
accordance with law; that I examined the Complainant and her witnesses; that there is
reasonable ground to believe that the offense charged had been committed and that the
accused is probably guilty thereof; that the accused was informed of the Complaint and of the
evidence submitted against him and was given the opportunity to submit controverting evidence;
and that the filing of this Information is with the prior authority and approval of the City
Prosecutor.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
{SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 9th of August 1999 in Quezon City.
AL CAPONE
City Prosecutor}78
Bail Recommended: P10,000.00
(2) THEFT79
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
75
Page 28 of 62
Plaintiff,
-
versus -
KLEPTO MANIAC,
Accused.
x --------------------------------------------- x
INFORMATION
The Undersigned accuses KLEPTO MANIAC of the crime of Theft, committed as
follows:
That on or about 3 July 1998, in the City of Quezon and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused,
then 11 years old and without any known address, willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously, with intent to gain, without force upon
things or violence upon persons and without the knowledge and
consent of MA ALAHAS, the owner, took a gold necklace studded
with diamonds valued at One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00) to the prejudice of said owner.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
CERTIFICATION AS TO CONDUCT OF INQUEST80
I hereby certify that the accused was lawfully arrested without a warrant and that, upon
being informed of his rights, refused to waive the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal
Code and, for this reason, an Inquest was conducted; that based on the complaint and the
evidence presented before me without any countervailing evidence submitted by the accused,
despite opportunity to do so, there is reasonable ground to believe that the accused has
committed the crime of theft and should, thus, be held for said crime; that this Information was
with the prior authority of the City Prosecutor.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 9th of August 1999 in Quezon City.
AL CAPONE
City Prosecutor
(3) ATTEMPTED RAPE81
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
-
versus -
MAEL SIA,
Accused.
x --------------------------------------------- x
INFORMATION
The undersigned accuses MAEL SIA of attempted rape committed as follows:
That on or about 6 June 1992, in Quezon City, the accused did then and
there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously enter the house of SEK SEE, a married
woman, and finding that her husband was away, with lewd designs and by
80
As discussed supra, this Certification accompanies an Information filed after an inquest and not a
preliminary investigation is conducted. An inquest is conducted only if the respondent was arrested
without a warrant and does not waive the provisions of Article 125 of the RPC and does not wish to avail
of a full-blown preliminary investigation.
81
1982 Bar Question;
Page 29 of 62
means of force and intimidation, commenced directly by overt acts to commit the
crime of attempted rape upon her person, to wit: while SEK SEE was cooking
lunch, the accused seized her from behind, threw her to the floor, raised her skirt,
pulled down her underwear and attempted to penetrate her with his sexual organ
and would have succeeded in doing so had not her loud protests and vigorous
resistance brought her neighbors to her assistance, causing the accused to flee
from the premises without completing all the acts of execution.
CONTRARY TO LAW with the aggravating circumstance of dwelling.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
CERTIFICATION OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OR INQUEST
(4) FRUSTRATED MURDER
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
-
versus -
MAMA MATAY,
Accused.
x --------------------------------------------- x
INFORMATION
The undersigned accuses MAMA MATAY of frustrated murder committed as follows:
That on or about 21 August 1996, in Quezon City, the accused did then
and there take a loaded .44 Caliber Magnum pistol, directly aim the same firearm
at the person of VIC TIMA, an invalid septuagenarian, and, at point blank range,
with intent to kill, discharge the firearm twice against the person of said Vic Tima,
inflicting on said Vic Tima two (2) wounds on his chest and stomach, which
wounds would have been fatal had not timely medical assistance been rendered
to the said Vic Tima.
CONTRARY TO LAW with the aggravating circumstances of Evident
Premeditation, use of firearm and disregard of age.
ELLIOT NESS
Assistant City Prosecutor
CERTIFICATION OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OR INQUEST
Page 30 of 62
versus -
KLEPTO MANIAC,
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x
MOTION TO QUASH
THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves to quash the Information for the crime
of theft on the following:
GROUNDS
1. IT CONTAINS AVERMENTS WHICH, IF TRUE, WOULD CONSTITUTE A
LEGAL JUSTIFICATION;
2. THIS COURT IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION.
In support, the accused respectfully states that:
ARGUMENT
The Information alleges that the accused KLEPTO MANIAC is eleven (11) years old and
without any known address. Under Article 12, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code, a
person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he acted with discernment, is exempt
from criminal liability.
There is no allegation that the accused acted with discernment. Even granting said
discernment, the accused cannot be tried but instead proceeded against under Article 80 of the
Revised Penal Code, which provides that a minor, unless sixteen years of age at the time of the
commission of a grave or less grave felony, cannot be tried but instead shall have the benefit of
a suspension of all proceedings against him. The duty of the court would be to commit the
minor to the custody or care of a public or private benevolent or charitable institution for the care
and education of homeless and delinquent children or to the custody of the Department of
Social Work and Development.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Information against the accused be
82
83
VIG CHAN,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------------- x
MOTION TO QUASH SEARCH WARRANT
The ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves for the quashal of Search Warrant No.
1122 issued by this Honorable Court on and dated 12 July 2000 based on the following
considerations:
1. Rule 126, sec. 10 provides expressly that a search warrant shall be valid for ten (10)
84
Rule 126, sec. 14, 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure; this is a new pleading expressly
recognized for the first time in the Rules, although it has been used widely in practice and even
acknowledged by the Supreme Court in case law. Please take note that this may be filed in and acted
upon only by the court where the action is filed but if no action has yet been filed, it may be filed with the
court that issued the search warrant. If no resolution has yet been made by the Search Warrant Court by
the time an Information is filed, then the trial court shall resolve the Motion to Quash.
85
Rule 126, sec. 6 in relation to sec. 1 (order in writing in the name of the People, signed by a judge
and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal property described therein and
bring it to the court) and sec. 4 (particular description of the place to be searched and the things to be
seized);
86
Rule 126, sec. 10, 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure;
87
Rule 126, sec. 4, 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure;
88
Id.;
89
Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 2; Rule 126, sec. 4, 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure;
Page 32 of 62
versus -
VIG CHAN,
90
Page 33 of 62
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------------- x
MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE UNLAWFULLY SEIZED
The ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves for the suppression of objects seized on
23 July 2001, pursuant to Search Warrant No. 1122 issued by this Honorable Court dated 12
July 2000, based on the following considerations:
[1] Search Warrant No. 1122 was served on the 11th day and is, thus, void.
[2] The motor vehicle seized does not fall within the property that may lawfully be
seized.
Discussion
[1] Search Warrant No. 1122 was
served on the 11th day and is, thus,
void.
1. Rule 126, sec. 10 provides expressly that a search warrant shall be valid for ten (10)
days from its date and that thereafter, it shall be void.
2. Search Warrant No. 1122 is dated 12 July 2000. It was served on the accused on
23 July 2000, the 11th day from its date; this is certified to by the Sworn Inventory and Return
executed by Major Alang Alam, the leader of the searching team (a copy of which is already part
of the records). A search was made on the same day, 23 July 2000; pursuant to said search,
certain objects were seized and delivered to the court. Under the law, the Search Warrant is
void.
3. No valid seizure may be made under a void warrant. For this reason, the following
objects must be suppressed:
[list items]
[2] The motor vehicle seized
does not fall within the
property that may lawfully be
seized.
4. On the occasion of the search, the searching party also seized accuseds green
Jaguar XJE with license plate, No. 1", allegedly for being subject of the offense. Thereafter, it
was impounded and kept at the PNP Motor Pool.
5. The motor vehicle cannot be subject of the offense as accused is charged with libel.
There is no relation between the motor vehicle and libel.
6. Moreover, the motor vehicle is not mala prohibita that would justify a seizure thereof;
neither could there be a seizure of evidence in plain view.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that all objects seized under the void Search
Warrant No. 1122 be declared INADMISSIBLE under the exclusionary rule in Article III, section
3(2) in relation to section 2. Furthermore, it is prayed that the Green Jaguar XJE with license
plate No. 1" be immediately returned to the accused.
Quezon City; 25 July 2001.
(SGD.) MA TAPANG
Counsel for Accused
Request for and Notice of Hearing99
versus -
NAKA PIIT,
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x
MOTION FOR BAIL
THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves to be allowed bail on the ground that
the prosecutions evidence of his guilt is not strong. In support, he respectfully submits the
following:
1. The Information alleges that he raped the private complainant on December 25,
1998 at his residence in Quezon City. The prosecutions own evidence, however, belies this
allegation as: (a) the medical certificate (attached as ANNEX A to the Information) states that
private complainant is in a virgin state with no physical and outward signs of trauma; (b) the
medical certificate issued by the NBI doctor (attached as ANNEX B to the Information) after a
physical examination of the accused, two (2) days after the alleged rape, shows that he is
suffering from erectile dysfunction and has been so afflicted for close to five (5) years now and
(c) the sworn statements of the private complainant conflict with and contradict each other such
that her credibility must be placed in doubt.
(2) For these reasons, there is no basis to conclude that the accused raped the private
complainant as there is less than circumstantial evidence of this fact. He is, thus, entitled to
bail as a matter of right.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the accused be granted: (1) a bail hearing,
during which the prosecution should be directed to present its evidence to show the strength of
its evidence of the accuseds guilt, and (2) thereafter, grant the accused reasonable bail.
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
Quezon City; _______________.
(SGD) MITCH MCDEERE
REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING
See Rule 114, as amended; however, as bail is generally a matter of right and is only limited and
made discretionary in capital cases, the allegation in this regard would invariably be to the effect that the
evidence of guilt is not strong and the relief prayed for would be a bail hearing and the subsequent
admission to bail.
101
See PD 968, as amended;
Page 35 of 62
Relief
Verification by applicant
Notice of Hearing
II. SAMPLE/REPRESENTATIVE FORM:
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
PASIG-BRANCH 69
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No. 114878
-
versus -
RECY DIVIST,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------------- x
APPLICATION FOR PROBATION
THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully applies for probation pursuant to the provisions
of Presidential Decree No. 968, as amended.
In support of this application, the accused respectfully submits the following:
1. Accused-applicant is of legal age and currently gainfully employed at ASN
Broadcasting Corporation located at Timog Avenue, Quezon City. On ________, she pleaded
guilty to the offense charged herein; consequently, this Honorable Court in its Order dated 8
March 1999 sentenced accused-applicant to an indeterminate penalty ranging from three (3)
years to five (5) years of prision correccional.
2. Accused-applicant humbly submits that she possesses all the qualifications and
none of the disqualifications enumerated under section 2 of Presidential Decree No. 968,
specifically:
2.1. She has not been convicted of any crime against national security
or public order;
2.2. She has not been previously convicted by final judgment of an
offense punishable by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month and one (1)
day and/or a fine of not less than Two Hundred Pesos (P200.00);
2.3. She has not previously applied for nor had been previously placed
under probation under Presidential Decree No. 968.
2.4. She has not started to serve her sentence and, to date, has not filed
any Notice of Appeal from the Order of conviction.
3 Finally, granting this application will not in any way depreciate the seriousness of the
offense charged nor cause any undue risk that during the period of probation, accused-applicant
will commit another crime. Moreover, accused-applicant does not need any correctional
treatment requiring commitment to an institution.
WHEREFORE, accused-applicant respectfully prays that her application for probation be
GRANTED and that she be placed under probation under such terms and conditions necessary
to attain and ensure the objectives of the law and which, under the circumstances, are fair, just
and reasonable in the sound discretion of this Honorable Court.
Quezon City for Pasig City; 12 March 1999.
(SGD) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Accused
Request for and Notice of Hearing
Page 36 of 62
ATTICUS FINCH
Private Prosecutor]104
102
Copy furnished:
MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Accused
B. COMMENT/OPPOSITION TO OFFER
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No. 000011
-
versus -
RECY DIVIST,
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x
COMMENT ON THE PROSECUTIONS
FORMAL OFFER OF EVIDENCE
THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully oppose the Prosecutions Offer of Evidence
for the following reasons:
1. Exhibit A, the sworn statement of Alang Kaso, the private complainant, and Exhibit
A-1, his signature are INADMISSIBLE because the private complainant was never presented to
authenticate the document or subjected to cross-examination, thus, the document is hearsay
and inadmissible.
2. Exhibit B, the post-dated check dated 30 June 1999, issued by the accused in the
amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00); Exhibit B-1, the dorsal side of the check with
notation DAIF; Exhibit B-2, the signature of accused on face of the check are INADMISSIBLE
for violation of the Best Evidence Rule as the original check was never presented; and no basis
for the presentation of secondary evidence laid.
ACCORDINGLY, the ACCUSED respectfully submits that the Prosecutions Exhibits
are INADMISSIBLE and must, thus, be EXCLUDED.105
Quezon City; _________________.
MITCH MCDEERE
Copy furnished:
ELLIOT NESS
Public Prosecutor
ATTICUS FINCH
Private Prosecutor
versus -
ANAKIN SKYWALKER,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------- x
105
Please note that the purpose of the offer is never objected to, rather it is admissibility of the
documenmt. The purpose of offer goes to weight of the document (unless of course, the objection is
relevance, then purpose may properly be objected to as relevance also determines admissiblity). Any
objections to purpose should be made in the Memorandum and an appropriate reservation to do so may
be stated in the Comment.
Page 38 of 62
versus -
PADME AMIDALA,
Defendant.
x ---------------------------------- x
DEMURRER TO THE EVIDENCE
DEFENDANT, by counsel, with leave of court previously sought and granted,107
respectfully submits this Demurrer to the Evidence because plaintiff has failed to prove
entitlement to his claims by a preponderance of evidence:
1. This action seeks to collect a sum of money arising from a contract.
106
Note the requirement of the law that a demurrer in criminal cases may be filed only with leave of
court and that for leave of court to be obtained, the pleading desired to be admitted must already be
attached. Thus, a Motion for Leave of Court to File Demurrer must already have the Demurrer attached.
See Form No. 4 .
107
Note the difference in the rule between a civil demurrer and a demurrer in criminal cases insofar
as effects of leave of court is concerned. A civil demurrer may be filed with or without leave of court but if
the demurrer is granted and later reversed on appeal, the defendant loses the right to adduce evidence.
See Form No. 4.
Page 39 of 62
2. Plaintiff, after resting his case, has failed to: (a) prove the authenticity of the contract,
(b) the extent of the obligation under the contract, (c) the demandability of the obligation under
the contract and (d) defendants liability for the obligation and damages.
3. Consequently, plaintiff has failed to prove his claims by a preponderance of evidence
and defendant is entitled to a dismissal of the Complaint against her.
WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully prays that the Complaint against her be
DISMISSED.
Quezon City; 1 June 1999.
[sgd] OBI WAN KENOBI
REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING
For:
Reconveyance
ALANG LUPA,
Defendant.
x ----------------------- x
NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS
THE REGISTER OF DEEDS
Antipolo City, Rizal Province
Please take notice that a parcel of land covered by TCT No 1234 located in Antipolo,
Rizal; registered in the name of defendant is the subject matter of an action for reconveyance of
an undivided one-sixth portion thereof filed by DAMI LUPA, above-named plaintiff.
Accordingly, please record this notice on the title.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
1 August 1999.
(Sgd) ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
Copy furnished:
MITCH MCDEERE, Esq.
Counsel for Defendant
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 1357
versus -
For: Legal
Separation
PADME AMIDALA
x -------------------------------- x
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE
THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT
Regional Trial Court
Quezon City-Branch 101
Please enter the appearance of the undersigned as counsel for defendant Padme
Amidala, with her express conformity as indicated below, in this case. Henceforth kindly
address all pertinent notices to the undersigned at the address given below.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 1 July 1999.
OBI WAN KENOBI
No. 1, Imzadi Place
Tatooine, Pasig City
WITH MY CONFORMITY:
PADME AMIDALA110
Copy furnished:
DARTH SIDIOUS
For: Legal
Separation
PADME AMIDALA
x -------------------------------- x
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE
THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT
Regional Trial Court
Quezon City-Branch 101
Please make of record the WITHDRAWAL of the undersigned as counsel for plaintiff
ANAKIN SKYWALKER, with his express conformity as indicated below, in this case.
Henceforth kindly address all pertinent notices to plaintiff at his address given in the Complaint.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 4 July 1999.
MACE WINDU
1 Imperial Palace, Cloud City, Pasig City
110
This is frequently overlooked but is actually the most important part of the Entry of Appearance
as it indicates to the Court the authority given and the source of such authority.
Page 41 of 62
WITH MY CONFORMITY:
ANAKIN SKYWALKER
111
Note that if the client gives express conformity, no reason for withdrawal needs to be given.
However, if withdrawal is without conformity, the court may ask counsel to secure conformity. If
withdrawal is due to fundamental and irreconcilable professional differences, then it must be stated so
that the absence of conformity of the erstwhile client is justified.
Page 42 of 62
For: Legal
Separation
PADME AMIDALA
x -------------------------------- x
SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL
THE UNDERSIGNED respectfully enters his appearance as counsel for defendant
Padme Amidala in substitution of former counsel Darth Maul, as shown by her express
conformity below. Henceforth, kindly address all pertinent notices to the undersigned at the
address given below.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
Quezon City; 1 July 1999.
OBI WAN KENOBI
Counsel for Defendant
2 Corruscant Place
Tatooine Road, Pasig City
WITH MY CONFORMITY:
PADME AMIDALA
versus -
PANA LO,
Defendant.
x------------------------- x
NOTICE OF APPEAL
PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully appeals to the Court of Appeals the Decision of this
Honorable Court dated 1 July 1999, a copy of which he received on 10 July 1999, for being
contrary to law and the evidence presented.
Quezon City for Manila; 11 July 1999.
ATTICUS FINCH
Counsel for Plaintiff
Copy furnished:
MITCH MCDEERE
Counsel for Defendant
112
113
PART
FOUR:
PLEADINGS
AND
LEGAL
DOCUMENTS IN DOMESTIC CASES AND SPECIAL
PROCEEDINGS
intention, they have expressly given their written consent to the adoption, as shown by their
statement, a copy of which is attached as ANNEX A.
4. Petitioners are qualified to adopt the minor and are financially capable of supporting
the minor; they are also morally qualified to bring up and educate the said minor.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that judgment be rendered in petitioners favor
adjudging the minor child _____________ freed from all legal obligations of obedience and
maintenance with respect to his/her natural parents and that he/she be declared to all legal
intents and purposes, the child of herein petitioners and that his/her surname be changed to
that of petitioners.
__________________, __________________.
[sgd] COUNSEL
Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping
114
Under AM No. 02-11-12-SC Proposed Rule on Provisional Orders adopted by the Supreme
Court on March 4, 2003 and which took effect on March 15, 2003, the following provisional orders may be
applied for upon filing of a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage: (a) spousal support [ 2], (b) child
support [ 3], (c) child custody [ 4], (d) visitation rights [ 5], (e) hold departure orders [ 6], (f) order of
protection [ 7] and (g) administration of common property [ 8].
115
Note that it may be psychological incapacity only on the part of one party so the allegations may
be tailored to address that situation.
Page 45 of 62
7.
Petitioners psychological incapacity is described in clinical terms as being
consistent with a V61.1 Partner Relational Problem and is said to have Masochistic Personality
Disorder or 301.9 Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified; on the other hand, the
assessment given by the psychologist of respondents psychological make-up is that he has a
301.20 Schizoid Personality Disorder with narcissistic features which is described as grave,
incurable and has antecedents. The psychological make-up of petitioner and respondent is
explained in greater detail in the Clinical Assessment Report (Report) dated December 28,
2001, a copy of which is attached as ANNEX E.
8. Their minor chidren are in petitioners custody and are being supported by her
financially and emotionally.
9. Petitioner submits that, despite the parties mutual psychological incapacity to
remain married to each other, the interests of the children are best served by having them
remain in her custody, with visitation rights extended to respondent. All of the children are
minors and, under the law, children under seven (7) years of age shall not be separated from
the mother, save for exceptional circumstances which do not exist in this case.116
10. Petitioner cannot, however, provide for all the financial needs of the children as she
is only earning a limited amount of money from her work whereas respondent is gainfully
employed and earns more than enough for his own personal needs. Petitioner earns only
(state amount) from her work as shown by her payslip attached as ANNEX F whereas
respondent earns (state amount) from his work as shown by his payslip attached as ANNEX G.
The common property of petitioner and respondent is insufficient for the support of the children.
Respondent must, thus, be directed to give support to his children in the amount of (state
amount).117
WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully prays that PROVISIONAL ORDERS for child
custody and child support be issued giving to petitioner custody pendente lite over their minor
children and directing respondent to give monthly support in the amount of (state amount),
subject to any adjustments that may be made based on changing earning capacity as well as
needs.
Petitioner also prays that, after trial, judgment be rendered in her favor by declaring
petitioner to be psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential obligations of her
marriage to respondent, thus -[1] Declaring the marriage between petitioner and respondent a nullity and, by
this token, ordering the dissolutin of the conjugal partnership of gains; and
[2] Awarding permanent custody of the children to petitioner, with express
acknowledgement of respondents visitation rights;
[3] Awarding support in the amount of (state amount) subject to adjustments to
be made depending on changes in earning capacity and needs of the children.
All other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.
Quezon City; July ____, 2002.
(COUNSEL)
(Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping)
116
Under the Rule on Provisional Orders, child custody may be sought in a petition for declaration
of nullity where the court considers the best interests of the child as paramount; provisional custody may
be awarded to the following based on the order of preference: (1) to both parents jointly, (2) to either
parent taking into account all relevant considerations, especially the choice of the child, (3) to the
surviving grandparent, or if there are several of them, to the grandparent chosen by the child above seven
years of age unless the grandparent chosen is unfit or disqualified, (4) to the eldest brother or sister over
21 years of age unless unfit or disqualified, (5) to the actual custodian over 21 years of age unless unfit or
disqualified, or (6) to any other person deemed by thecourt suitable to provide proper care and guidance.
4.
117
Under the Rule on Provisional Orders, child support may also be sought. It must first be taken
from the properties of the absolute community or the conjugal partnership. In the discretion of the court,
either parent or both may be ordered to give an amount necessary for support, maintenance and
education of the child in proportion to the resources or means of the givern and to the needs of the
recipient. Thus, the earning capacity of the parent and the amount needed for support must be alleged.
Page 46 of 62
FORM NO.
WILL118
118
119
Acknowledgment
known to me to be the same persons who executed the foregoing instrument, denominated as a
Contract of Lease consisting of __ pages, signed on each and every page by the parties and
their instrumental witnesses, having acknowledged the same before me as their own free and
voluntary act and deed.
TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, witness now my hand and seal on the date and
place mentioned above.
N.O. TARIO
Until December 31, 1999
PTR No. 0000111/1/05/99:Makati City
Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of 1999;
120
WE, the undersigned witnesses, whose residences are stated opposite our respective
names, do hereby certify that: the testator _________________has published unto us the
foregoing will consisting of ___ pages numbered correlatively in letters on the upper part of
each page, as his/her last will and testament and has signed the same and every page thereof,
on the left margin, in our joint presence and we, in turn, at his/her request have witnessed and
signed the same and every page thereof, on the left margin, in the presence of the testator and
in the presence of each other.
SAKSI 1
SAKSI 2
SAKSI 3
Residence
Residence
Residence
Page 50 of 62
Not applicable,
Donor
ACCEPTED:
DAMI UTANG
Donee
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
MIRON 1
MIRON 2
Acknowledgment
Page 51 of 62
Page 52 of 62
Sometimes, it may be necessary to specify whether the meeting was a special or general
meeting.
124
1987 Bar Question;
Page 53 of 62
)
)
s.s.
With my consent:
ASA WA
Vendors Wife
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
MIRON 1
MIRON 2
Acknowledgment
)
)
s.s.
Page 55 of 62
)
)
s.s.
)
)
s.s.
DEED OF RESALE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
I, MA GU LANG, Filipino, married, of legal age, and resident of _______________, for
and in consideration of _______________ Pesos (P____), to me paid by MA YA MAN, Filipino,
of legal age, married and resident of ___________________, do hereby RESELL,
RETRANSFER and RECONVEY unto said MA YA MAN that certain parcel of land, with all the
buildings and improvements thereon, situated at Makati City, and more particularly described,
as follows:
(Copy technical description in title)
covered by Transfer (or Original) Certificate of Title No. ____ of the Registry of Deeds of
Makati, and which property was previously sold to under pacto de retro by the said MA YA MAN
on _____________, executed before Notary Public __________ and bearing Notarial
Registration No. ___, Page No. ____, Book No. ____ and Series of 19__ of his Notarial
Register, a copy of which is attached as ANNEX A.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this deed this __ day of ______________
199__ at Makati City.
MA GU LANG
Vendor
[Note: if vendor is married, marital consent must be secured; thus, the Deed must also indicate
this. If vendor is married, then add the following:]
With my consent:
BA TAPA
Vendors Wife
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
MIRON 1
MIRON 2
Acknowledgment
)
)
s.s.
of which real estate the ASSIGNOR is the registered owner, his title thereto being evidenced by
Transfer (or Original) Certificate of Title No. ____________ of the Register of Deeds of
_____________.
That the ASSIGNEE does hereby accept this assignment in full payment of the
above-mentioned debt of ______________ Pesos (P_________).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Deed on __________ at
_________________________.
DAMI UTANG
DAMI LUPA
Assignor
Assignee
With my marital consent:
ALANG MALAY
BIL MOKO
Acknowledgment
)
)
s.s.
CHATTEL MORTGAGE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
That I, DAMI KOTSE, of legal age, married and resident of Makati, for and in
consideration of the loan of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P500,000.00), granted to
me by YAMAN NYA, also of legal age, married and resident of Makati, to be paid one (1) year
from date hereof, have transferred and conveyed by way of chattel mortgage unto said YAMAN
NYA, his heirs, successors and assigns, free from all liens and encumbrances that certain
motor vehicle, at present in my possession at my address, more particularly described as:
Model/Make No./Color
Chassis No.
Engine No.
:
BMW 738i (1998),
racing green;
:
00000001111;
:
00000001111;
of which I am the true and absolute owner by title thereto, being evidenced by Registration
Certificate of Motor Vehicle No. ______ issued in my name by the Land Transportation Office
on __________________.
This chattel mortgage has been executed in order to secure the full and faithful payment
of my obligation to YAMAN NYA in accordance with the terms and conditions of this instrument;
Upon payment, this contract shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall continue in full force
and effect and may be foreclosed in accordance with law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument on __________________199_
at Makati City.
DAMI KOTSE
Affidavit of Good Faith126
We severally swear that DAMI KOTSE, mortgagor, and YAMAN NYA, mortgagee, have
executed the foregoing Chattel Mortgage in order to guarantee as good and binding the
obligations mentioned above and is not intended to defraud creditors.
125
126
YAMAN NYA
DAMI
KOTSE
Signed in the presence of:
UZI 1
UZI 2
Acknowledgment
B. IN CRIMINAL CASES -I. From MTC (as trial court) to RTC (in appellate jurisdiction)138
136
Page 61 of 62
II. From RTC (on pure questions of law)146 or CA (in appellate jurisdiction) to
SC147
e:\myfiles\forms2003
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149