You are on page 1of 3

Republic of the Philippines REGIONAL TRIAL COURT National Capital Judicial Region Branch 38 Manila ERNIE M.

. ANDRADE, Petitioner, Versus Civil Case No. 09-122592 For: Judicial Declaration of Nullity of Marriage

IMELDA M. YUSON-ANDRADE, Respondent. X-----------------------X PRE-TRIAL BRIEF This is an action for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage under Articles 36 & 68 of the New Family Code. Brief Statement of the Case Petitioner alleges in his Petition, viz: a) that petitioner and respondent are husband and wife; b) that respondent is clinically found to be psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential requisites of marriage identified as Anti-Social and Narcissistic Personality Disorder; c) that the root cause of such illness is traced from respondents childhood; d) such illness is diagnosed to be grave and incurable; e) that such illness existed prior to the marriage and became apparent at the time of the marriage. Petitioner and respondent have no children. Petitioner further alleges that he and respondent met each other as phone pals and texts mates. The personally met in 1999, when she came home from abroad in Hong Kong as a domestic helper. Right after they met and became physically attracted each other and indulged in intimate sexual relations. When she went back to Hong Kong, she arranged for him to go there. He was impressed with her because she appeared to him as a flamboyant, moneyed, expensive and generous. After their out of the spur wedding on October 23, 2000, she purchased a house and lot, where they lived together. It was however when they lived together that he became aware of respondents true nature. She was the over jealous, manipulative, violent, self-centered type of person, demanding, bossy type of person. She had no qualms in showing her fits of anger and madness even in public places and even in the presence of neighbors. They were always quarrelling and their quarrels were always violent and humiliating because respondent would always flaunt that she is the one who has money and that she was the one who bought the house and all the other material things in the house. The last quarrel they had ended in petitioners being driven out of the house. After a week, when he came back, their house was already padlock and much as he waited for her to return even outside of their house, she never returned until one of the neighbors told him that respondent already went back abroad. Since then, he had never seen her nor had any news of her whatsoever. That he has filed this case because he is convinced that the respondent will never come back and fulfill her obligations to their marriage. He wants to start life anew, free from the legal entanglement which was not meant to be. Hence this case.

Page 02. PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS 1. 2. 3. 4. The identity of parties as petitioner and respondent; The fact of marriage, parties having been married on October 23, 2000 ; The no children born in wedlock and no property was acquired by both spouses; and, Their de-facto separation and the absence of cohabitation between the spouses since year 2000. LIST OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Report of Assistant Provincial Prosecutor stating absence of collusion between the parties --------Exhibit A Marriage Contract ----Exhibit "B" The Psychological Report-----Exhibit "E" Judicial Affidavit of petitioner ----Exhibit F Judicial Affidavit of Nedy Tayag ----Exhibit G Copy of letter of Invitation with Return Card & Registry Receipt ---- Exhibit H with submarkings; Letter left by respondent when she left the conjugal dwelling ---Exhibit I Judicial Affidavit of a corroborative witness ABSTRACT OF TESTIMONIES Petitioner will be testifying on the allegations in the Petition and will present documentary evidence. The Clinical Psychologist who will testify on the psychological evaluation done on both petitioner and respondent. A corroborative witness will be presented. NUMBER OF WITNESSES TO BE PRESENTED Petitioner and at least two (2) witnesses. ADMISSIONS Outside of the matters alleged, petitioner is not inclined to admit further matters. APPLICABLE LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE Provisions on the Family Code. ISSUES Whether or not respondent or both the petitioner and respondent are psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential requisites of marriage which is a valid ground under Art. 36 of the New Family Code to declare the marriage a nullity. AVAILABILITY FOR TRIAL Counsel will be available for trial on the January and February settings or at other dates convenient with this Honorable Court.

Page 03. Quezon City for Manila. March 8, 2011. Respectfully Submitted: Atty. MARIA LOURDES PAREDES-GARCIA
Counsel for Petitioner Wheels Bldg., 222 E. Rodriguez Sr., Ave Quezon City, Metro Manila PTR No. 4645020 January 12/11 / Quezon City IBP No. 828374/ January 10, 11 Rizal Roll No. 33476 MCLE Compliance III 00013449 April 20, 2010

Copy furnished: Office of the City Prosecutor ------------------- Personal Service Manila City Office of the Solicitor General ----------Registered Mail w/ Return Card 135 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Vill., Makati City EXPLANATION

Pursuant to the Provision of Rule 13, Section 11 of the 1997 Rules in Civil Procedure as Amended, undersigned submits this Explanation that the service of this Pre- Trial Brief was to Office of the Solicitor General by Registered Mail instead of personal serve in view of lack of manpower.

My legal documents/Family/Andrade/Pre-trial Brief