Republic of The Philippines Regional Trial Court National Capital Judicial Region Branch 85, Manila

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 85, MANILA
MARK F. BAUTISTA,
Plaintiff,
-versus-
CIVIL
CASE
127276
X COLLEGE, ET. AL.,

Defendants.
x--------------------------------------------x
TRANSCRIPT
OF
STENOGRAPHIC NOTES
April 17, 2015
Exclusive copy for the:

Court
Complainant/Plaintif
Accused/Defendant
NO.
08-
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
vs. X College, Inc., et. al.
Civil Case No. 08-127276
Page 2 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
Petitioner
Respondent
MARK ANTHONY F. BAGUAL

Court Stenographer III
TRANSCRIPT
of
stenographic
notes
of
the
proceedings of the above-entitled case
held
before
HON.
ROSAURO
ANGELITO DAVID, Presiding Judge of
this Court, this 17th day of April 2015, at
8:30 in the morning.
APPEARANCES:
ATTY. X
Counsel for the Plaintiff
ATTY. Y
Counsel for the Defendants
OTHER PERSONS PRESENT:
Court Interpreter
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 3 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
INTERPRETER:
For pre-trial conference, 12-127276, MARK F.
Bautista versus X College, Inc., et. al.
COURT:
Appearances?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Good morning, Your Honor, I am Atty. X,
respectfully appearing as counsel for plaintiff
MARK F. Bautista.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Good morning, Your Honor, I am Y, respectfully
appearing for the defendants.
COURT:
This is for pre-trial conference.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 4 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
Are you ready?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
But you have been given a Special Power of
Attorney?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
Before we proceed, can you just give me a short
summary of your respective positions?
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 5 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
COURT:
Any offer for stipulations?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Are the defendants willing to stipulate the
existence and due execution of X Colleges ByLaws and Amended Articles of Incorporation as
duly filed with the SEC?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Admitted.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
That plaintiff Gregory Alan F. Bautista, then
President and Chairman of X College, did not
preside the 31 January 2011 Special Meeting of
the Board of Trustees of X College?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Admitted.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
The 2005 X-College By-Laws?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Admitted.
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 6 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
There was a meeting that was conducted by the
Board of Directors of X College on 31 January
2011?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Admitted.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
That is all, Your Honor.
COURT:
Defendants?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is plaintiff willing to stipulate that when defendant
Ma. Cecilia Bautista-Lim with the assistance of
Board of Trustees of X COLLEGE assumed the
presidency of X COLLEGE, they discovered through
a special audit, anomalous transactions entered
into
by
plaintiff
Alan
Bautista
including
appropriating for himself amounts of money
amounting
to
Twenty
Million
Pesos
(P20,000,000.00) and Seventeen Million Two
Hundred Fifty Three Thousand and Twenty Five
Pesos (P17,253,025.00), and that he created
business units outside the ambit of the corporation
such as establishing two extension schools of X
COLLEGE. He also encouraged students from X
COLLEGE to transfer enrollment to the prejudice of
the school. He directed funds to other institution.
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 7 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
Increased the compensation of his office from Two

Hundred Thousand (200,000.00) to Five Hundred
Thousand (500,000.00) per month without the
prior approval of the Board of Trustees. Taking over
and trying to conceal properties in Laguna and
Cavite both properties of the school. Grabbing
control of extension business units of the school
namely
Security
Agency
Janitorial
and
Maintenance and treated them as his own
businesses and he unilaterally increased the
tuition fees of X COLLEGE.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Not stipulated, Your Honor.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate
COURT:
Counsel, for the next stipulation, can you cut it
into phrases so that we can catch what matters
you want to be stipulated on?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Okay, Your Honor.
COURT:
Because it is too long.
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 8 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate that the said
special audit was presented to and discussed at
the BOD meeting?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate the plaintiff Alan
was requested to explain with regard to the
special audit, but he neglected to attend this
meeting, Your Honor.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate that at the
annual meeting of June 1, 2011, the Board of
Trustees resolves to take legal action to recover
the funds misappropriated by plaintiff Alan for
himself?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 9 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate that a formal

demand was made to plaintiff Alan to account for
or return the misappropriated funds?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
COURT:
Isnt that supported by a document, the formal
demand?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor. I believe this had been premarked, Your Honor.
COURT:
Yes. So why not stipulate on that when there was
a demand letter sent?
Or is there an issue
whether he received it or not?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
Because the purpose of the pre-trial is to shorten
the proceedings. If there are facts that you feel
that will readily be verifiable from the document
you submitted it to the Court, Id rather that it be
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 10 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
stipulated.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor. I believe it was not received by
MARK Bautista.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
But could we stipulate, Your Honor, instead on an
annual meeting, Your Honor, we have the minutes,
Your Honor.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
However the plaintiff is not part of it. There was
no proof of receipt of the demand letter.
COURT:
So, not stipulated. Proceed.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate that in the
Special Meeting of 10 August 2011, the Board of
Trustees included in the agenda the suspension
and expulsion of plaintiff Alan from X COLLEGE?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 11 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate that repeated
attempts to explore amicable settlements were
made by the Board of Trustees, but plaintiff Alan
refused to cooperate?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate that the Board of
Trustees of X COLLEGE finally resolved to call a
Special Meeting on 11 January 2012 with notices
duly sent to sanction the plaintiff for his culpable
violation?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Lastly, Your Honor, is the plaintiff willing to
stipulate that the Special Meeting on January 11,
2012 was attended by 9 out of 10 members of the
Board of Trustees with only plaintiff Alan absent?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 12 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate that the Board
unanimously voted for plaintiff Alans removal as
trustee?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
That would be all.
COURT:
Let us go to the issues.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
For the plaintiff, the issues,
Your Honor, are:
Whether or not defendants Rodolfo Valentino
Bautista, Ma. Cecilia Bautista-Lim, Ma. Elena
Bautista, and Eduardo Bautista, should honor their
covenant in the Certificate of Acquiescence that
they duly executed? Second, Whether or not the
plaintiff was illegally removed as President and
Chairman of the Board of Trustees of defendant X
College (X COLLEGE)? Third, Your Honor, whether
or not the plaintiff should be reinstated in his
former position as President and Chairman of the
Board of Trustees of X COLLEGE? And last, Your
Honor, whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to the
damages claimed in this case?
COURT:
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 13 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
For the defendants?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
For the defendants, Your Honor, first issue,
whether or not plaintiff MARK F. Bautista was
legally removed or expelled as a trustee of the
Board of Trustees of X COLLEGE? And issue
number two (2), whether or not X COLLEGE is
entitled to receive moral damages, attorneys
fees, and other costs of suit?
COURT:
Now, the evidence you intend to present.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
For the documentary pieces of evidence for the
plaintiff, Your Honor.
COURT:
Let us begin first with the testimonial.
your witnesses?
Who are
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor. For the plaintiff.
present MARK Bautista, Your
reservation, Your Honor.
COURT:
We intend to
Honor, with
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 14 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
As you know, pre-trial limits our witnesses

generally to who you mention now, so are you
telling me that as of this pre-trial stage, you have
not yet determined who are the possible people
that you intend to present other than the plaintiff.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
That is, Your Honor, we will just be presenting the
plaintiff.
COURT:
Just one witness?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
And of course, he will be testifying on all the
material allegations. What about the defendants?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Your Honor, we will be presenting Ma. Cecilia
Bautista-Lim. We already furnished the Court with
her judicial affidavit.
COURT:
Have you furnished him a copy of the judicial
affidavit?
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 15 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
For the documentary evidence?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
For the documentary evidence, Your Honor, the
documentary exhibits for the plaintiff was already
marked during the preliminary conference last
April 10 2015, Your Honor. That would constitute
as our documentary evidence, Your Honor. It will
be Exhibits A to I, Your Honor.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
As to the defendants, Your Honor, for our
documentary evidence, we will be presenting
those that were pre-marked on the 10 April 2015
pre-marking, Your Honor, which would consist of
Exhibits 1 to 34-A.
COURT:
Since, we only have one (1) witness each, I think
we can finish this proceeding fast. How many
hearing dates would you want for your witness?
Maybe one setting for each witness?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 16 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
And under the Judicial Affidavit Rule, we finish one
witness in one day, right? So let us just set two (2)
hearing dates.
One for the presentation of
plaintiffs evidence and one for defendants.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Okay, Your Honor.
COURT:
So when?
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
Available on May 19, Your Honor.
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
May 19, also available, Your Honor.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL:
June 19?
DEFENDANTS COUNSEL:
Yes, June 19.
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 17 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
INTERPRETER:
For plaintiffs evidence, Your Honor, May 19 at 8:30
a.m. And for defendants evidence, June 19 at
8:30 a.m.
COURT:
ORDER
At todays proceeding for the continuation
of the pre-trial conference, Atty. X, for the
plaintiff, and Atty. Y, for the defendants,
appeared.
Accordingly, the parties stipulation on 26
February 2015 are limited to the following
matters:
The existence and due execution of X
COLLEGEs By-Laws and Amended
Articles of Incorporation as duly filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission;
That plaintiff MARK F. Bautista, then
President and Chairman of X COLLEGE,
did not preside the 31 January 2011
Special Meeting of the Board of Trustees
of X COLLEGE;
The 2005 X COLLEGE By-Laws;
There was a
meeting that was
conducted by the Board of Directors of X
COLLEGE on 31 January 2011;
That there was a Court of Appeals
Decision and Resolution in CA-G.R. SP.
No. 119077 involving the same parties
entitled MARK F. Bautista vs. X
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 18 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
COLLEGE, et. al., and there is a

Resolution from the Supreme Court
dated 18 April 2012 relative to the
aforementioned case.
Plaintiffs counsel did not stipulate on any
of the points proposed for stipulation by
defendants counsel in open court.
The issues for the plaintiff are as follows:
(1)
Whether or not defendants Rodolfo
Valentino Bautista, Ma. Cecilia BautistaLim, Ma. Elena Bautista, and Eduardo
Bautista, should honor their covenant in
the Certificate of Acquiescence that they
duly executed?
(2)
Whether or not the plaintiff was illegally
removed as President and Chairman of
the Board of Trustees of defendant (X
COLLEGE)?
(3)
Whether or not the plaintiff should be
reinstated in his former position as
President and Chairman of the Board of
Trustees of X COLLEGE?
(4)
Whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to
the damages claimed in this case?
The issues for the defendants are as
follows:
(1)
Whether or not plaintiff MARK F. Bautista
was legally removed or expelled as a
trustee of the Board of Trustees of X
COLLEGE?
(2)
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 19 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x
Whether or not X COLLEGE is entitled to

receive moral damages, attorneys fees,
and other costs of suit?
The parties intend to present the
documents that were pre-marked during
preliminary conference held on 10 April 2015
before the Branch Clerk of Court.
The witnesses for the parties are as
follows:
(1)
For plaintiff: MARK F. Bautista
(2)
For defendants: Ma. Cecilia Bautista-Lim
The presentation of plaintiffs witness is
set on May 19, 2015 at 8:30 in the morning,
and the presentation of defendants witness
is set on June 19, 2015 at 8:30 in the
morning.
The Courts notes the submission of the
judicial affidavits of the parties respective
witnesses. The pre-trial conference is hereby
terminated.
The parties are directed to inform the
Court if there are any errors or corrections
that should be made therein within five (5)
days from receipt of the Pre-trial Order.
SO ORDERED.
x----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
I hereby certify that the foregoing transcription of
stenographic notes is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and hearing ability.
TSN 04.17.15
Mark F. Bautista
Page 20 of 22
x-----------------------------------------------------------------x


Republic of The Philippines Regional Trial Court National Capital Judicial Region Branch 85, Manila

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of The Philippines Regional Trial Court National Capital Judicial Region Branch 85, Manila

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

X COLLEGE, ET. AL.,

April 17, 2015

Exclusive copy for the:

MARK ANTHONY F. BAGUAL

Yes, Your Honor.

Increased the compensation of his office from Two

Is the plaintiff willing to stipulate that a formal

For the defendants?

As you know, pre-trial limits our witnesses

Yes, Your Honor.

COLLEGE, et. al., and there is a

Whether or not X COLLEGE is entitled to

MARK ANTHONY F. BAGUAL

You might also like