You are on page 1of 5

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT


DESIGNATED FAMILY COURT
Branch 43, Dagupan City
MARIAN RIVERA
Petitioner,
- versus -

CIVIL CASE NO. 1233456-78


FOR:
Declaration of Nullity of

Marriage
DINGDONG DANTES,
Respondent.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
PETITIONER by the undersigned counsel and
Honorable Court most respectfully states:

unto

this

BRIEF STATEMENT OF PETITIONERS CLAIMS AND DEFENSES


This is an action for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage under
Articles 36 & 68 of the New Family Code.
1. respondent and petitioner are husband and wife;
2. that both respondent and petitioners are clinically found to be
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential
requisites of marriage identified as respondent having Narcissistic
Personality Disorder with Anti-Social Traits while petitioner is
suffering with Histrionic Personality Disorder;
3. that the root cause of such illness is traced from their respective
childhood;
4. such illness is diagnosed to be grave, serious and incurable;
5. that such illness existed before, at the time of the marriage and
during the marriage.
6. that a child was born in wedlock ;
7. their de-facto separation which culminated from petitioners
frustration of respondents mercurial change of disposition,
abusive and manipulative conduct, immaturity, excessive
spending and adulterous conduct;

Page | 1

8. that respondent failed to give love, emotional support and fidelity


to the marriage;
9. that respondent denies all the allegations of the Petitioner.

WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO AN AMICABLE SETTLEMENT OR


ALTERNATIVE MODES OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION
a. Subject to a concrete proposal that is fair and reasonable and a
reciprocal manifestation of openness from Respondent, Petitioner
is open to the possibility of amicably settling this dispute
b. Petitioner respectfully submits that the desired terms of any
amicable settlement would involve the dismissal of the petition
on the ground of lack of cause of action, and the payment of
damages prayed for.

SUMMARY OF FACTS AND PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS


1. The identity of parties as petitioner and respondent;
2. The fact of marriage, parties having been married on December 02,
2002 ;
3. The a child was born in wedlock;
4. The no property was acquired by both spouses; and,
5. Their de-facto separation and the absence of cohabitation between
the spouses.
PROPOSAL FOR ADMISSION
1. that both respondent and petitioners are clinically found to be
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential requisites
of marriage identified as respondent having Narcissistic Personality
Disorder with Anti-Social Traits while petitioner is suffering with
Histrionic Personality Disorder;
2. that the said disorder of the respondent is grave, serious and
incurable.
3. That the respondent and the petitioner are both psychologically
incapacitated to comply with the requisites of marriage.

Page | 2

ISSUES TO BE TRIED OR RESOLVED


Whether or not respondent is psychologically incapacitated to
comply with the essential requisites of marriage which is a valid
ground under Art. 36 and 68 of the New Family Code to declare the
marriage a nullity.
DOCUMENTS OR EXHIBITS TO BE PRESENTED
1. Marriage Contract ----Exhibit "A"
Purpose: To prove the existence of the marriage between the
petitioner and the respondent
2. Birth Certificate of child-----Exhibits "B"
Purpose: To prove that the child was born in wedlock prior to the
marriage of the respondent and petitioner
3. The Psychological Report-----Exhibit "C
Purpose: To prove that both respondent and petitioners are clinically
found to be psychologically incapacitated to comply with the
essential requisites of marriage identified as Narcissistic Personality
Disorder with Anti-Social Traits while petitioner is suffering with
Histrionic Personality Disorder and that the said disorder is grave,
serious and incurable.
A MANIFESTATION OF THEIR HAVING AVAILED OF OR THEIR
INTENTION TO AVAIL DISCOVERY PROCEDURE OR REFERRAL
TO A COMMISIONER
a. Considering the relatively simple issues presented, Respondent
does not intend to avail of discovery at this time.
b.Subject, however, to a concrete and reasonable request for
discovery from Petitioner, Respondent reserves the right to resort to
discovery before trial.
NUMBER AND NAMES OF WITNESSES AND THE SUBSTANCE
OF THEIR RESPECTIVE TESTIMONIES
Petitioner intends to present three (2) witnesses, to wit:
1. Marian Rivera, petitioner
2. Pauleen Luna, clinical psychologist
Petitioner will be testifying on the allegations in the Petition and
will present documentary evidence. The Clinical Psychologist who
Page | 3

will testify on the psychological evaluation done on both petitioner


and respondent.
Petitioner Marian Rivera, reserves the right to present any and all
documentary evidence , which shall become relevant to rebut
respondents witnesses , if necessary.
APPLICABLE LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE
1. Provisions on the Family Code
2. Applicable laws and jurisprudence relevant on the matter.
AVAILABILITY FOR TRIAL
The petitioner needs at least five (5) trial dates to present its
case to be agreed upon during the Pre-trial Conference.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED to this Honorable Court this 19th
day of April 2014 at Justice Hall, Dagupan City, Philippines.

15Dagupan City
Dagupan

ATTY. GLAIZA MAE G. MASAOY


Counsel for the Petitioner
123 Bldg. Perez Blvd., Dagupan City
IBP No.11 764814 dtd. 01-07PTR No.1 5440074 /01/14/15/
Roll No. 1330076
MCLE Compliance III 000193280
Dtd. March 27, 2014

Copy furnished:
Atty. Lilibeth Palado
--------------------------Personal Service
Counsel for the Respondent
Palado and Associates
Asingan, Pangasinan
Office of the City Prosecutor ------------------- Personal Service
Dagupan City
Office of the Solicitor General ----------Registered Mail w/ Return
Card
135 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Vill.,
Makati City
EXPLANATION

Page | 4

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 was to Office of the
Solicitor General by Registered Mail instead of personal serve in
view of lack of manpower.

Page | 5