You are on page 1of 52

1 Lender extended to Borrower a Pl00,000.

0.00 loan covered Yes, Lender correctly applied the Civil Procedure Cause of action Joinder and mis- 2015
by a promissory note. Later, Borrower obtained another Totality Rule and the Rule on Joinder of joinder of causes
Pl00,000.00 loan again covered by a promissory note. Still Causes of Action. Under the Totality of action
later, Borrower obtained a P300,000.00 loan secured by a Rule where the claims in all the causes
real estate mortgage on his land valued at PHP500,000.00. of action are principally for recovery of
Borrower defaulted on his payments when the loans money the aggregate amount claimed
matured. Despite demand to pay the PHP 500,000.00 loan, shall be the test of jurisdiction. The
Borrower refused to pay. Lender, applying the totality rule, facts in the problem satisfy the Totality
filed against Borrower with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Rule, hence, the aggregate amount
Manila, a collection suit for PHP500,000.00. claimed, which is PhP 500,000 shall be
the test of jurisdiction and thus it is the
Did Lender correctly apply the totality rule and the rule on RTC of Manila which has jurisdiction.
joinder of causes of action? (2%) Under the Rule on Joinder of Causes of
Action, a party may in one pleading
assert as many causes of action as he
may have against an opposing party
but it does not include Special Civil
Actions. In the problem given, the
remedy resorted is a collection suit,
thus the Joinder of Causes of Action is
proper.
4 Circe filed with the RTC a complaint for the foreclosure of The effect of Scylla’s answer to the Civil Procedure Pleadings Effect of failure to 2015
real estate mortgage against siblings Scylla and Charybdis, complaint is that the court shall try the plead
co-owners of the property and cosignatories to the case against both Scylla and Charybdis
mortgage deed. The siblings permanently reside in Athens, upon the answer filed by Scylla.
Greece. Circe tipped off Sheriff Pluto that Scylla is on a Under Section 3(c) of Rule 9, when a
balikbayan trip and is billeted at the Century Plaza Hotel in pleading asserting a claim states a
Pasay City. Sheriff Pluto went to the hotel and personally common cause of action against
served Scylla the summons, but the latter refused to several defending parties, some of
receive summons for Charybdis as she was not authorized whom answer and the others fail to do
to do so. Sheriff Pluto requested Scylla for the email so, the court shall try the case against
address and fax number of Charybdis which the latter all upon the answers thus, filed and
readily gave. Sheriff Pluto, in his return of the summons, render judgment upon the evidence
stated that "Summons for Scylla was served personally as presented.
shown by her signature on the receiving copy of the In the problem given, there was a
summons. Summons on Charybdis was served pursuant to common cause of action against Scylla
the amendment of Rule 14 by facsimile transmittal of the and Charybdis. since both were co-
summons and complaint on defendant's fax number as signatories to the mortgage deed.
evidenced by transmission verification report automatically Hence, the court should not render
generated by the fax machine indicating that it was judgment by default against Charybdis
received by the fax number to which it was sent on the but should proceed to try die case upon
date and time indicated therein." Circe, sixty (60) days after the answer filed and the evidence
her receipt of Sheriff Pluto's return, filed a Motion to presented by Scylla.
Declare Charybdis in default as Charybdis did not file any
responsive pleading.

Scylla seasonably filed her answer setting forth therein as a


defense that Charybdis had paid the mortgage debt. On
the premise that Charybdis was properly declared in
default, what is the effect of Scylla's answer to the
complaint? (2%)
7 Strauss filed a complaint against Wagner for cancellation of Grieg may file a motion for leave to Civil Procedure Intervention Requisites for 2015
title. Wagner moved to dismiss the complaint because intervene. intervention
Grieg, to whom he mortgaged the property as duly According to the Rules of Court, a
annotated in the TCT, was not impleaded as defendant. person who has a legal interest in the
matter in litigation may, with leave of
If the case should proceed to trial without Grieg being court, be allowed to intervene in the
impleaded as a party to the case, what is his remedy to action (Sec. 1, Rule 19, Rules of Court).
protect his interest? (2%) In the case at bar, Grieg as a mortgagee
has a legal interest in the title subject-
matter of the litigation. Thus, he may
validly intervene in the case.
8 Ernie filed a petition for guardianship over the person and No, the objection was not proper. In Civil Procedure Actions Civil actions 2015
properties of his father, Ernesto. Upon receipt of the notice the absence of special provisions, the versus special
of hearing, Ernesto filed an opposition to the petition. rules provided for in ordinary actions, proceedings
Ernie, before the hearing of the petition, filed a motion to shall be, as far as practicable,
order Ernesto to submit himself for mental and physical applicable in special proceedings.
examination which the court granted. After Ernie's lawyer Under the rules on guardianship, there
completed the presentation of evidence in support of the are no special provisions on demurrer
petition and the court's ruling on the formal offer of to evidence. Hence, the provisions of
evidence, Ernesto's lawyer filed a demurrer to evidence. rule 33 (demurrer to evidence) in
Ernie's lawyer objected on the ground that a demurrer to ordinary actions may be applied.
evidence is not proper in a special proceeding.

Was Ernie's counsel's objection proper? (2%)


14 Aldrin entered into a contract to sell with Neil over a parcel No, the court should not grant Neil’s Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2015
of land. The contract stipulated a P500,000.00 down Motion to Dismiss. Under Section 5 of pleading
payment upon signing and the balance payable in twelve Rule 7, a certification against forum
(12) monthly installments of Pl00,000.00. Aldrin paid the shopping is required only for
down payment and had paid three (3) monthly installments complaints or initiatory pleadings or
when he found out that Neil had sold the same property to petitions. Here the "Petition for the
Yuri for Pl.5 million paid in cash. Aldrin sued Neil for specific Issuance of a Writ of Execution,”
performance with damages with the RTC. Yuri, with leave although erroneously denominated as
of court, filed an answer-in-intervention as he had already a petition is actually a motion for
obtained a TCT in his name. After trial, the court rendered issuance of a writ of execution under
judgment ordering Aldrin to pay all the installments due, Rule 39. Hence the motion to dismiss
the cancellation of Yuri's title, and Neil to execute a deed of on the ground of lack of a certification
sale in favor of Aldrin. When the judgment became final against forum shopping should be
and executory, Aldrin paid Neil all the installments but the denied.
latter refused to execute the deed of sale in favor of the
former.
Aldrin filed a "Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of
Execution" with proper notice of hearing. The petition
alleged, among others, that the decision had become final
and executory and he is entitled to the issuance of the writ
of execution as a matter of right. Neil filed a motion to
dismiss the petition on the ground that it lacked the
required certification against forum shopping.

Should the court grant Neil's Motion to Dismiss? (3%)


39 Hercules was walking near a police station when a police Yes. According to the Rules of Court Civil Procedure Cause of action Meaning of cause 2015
officer signaled for him to approach. As soon as Hercules under Rule 2, Sec. 2, cause of action is of action
came near, the police officer frisked him but the latter defined as the act or omission by which
found no contraband. The police officer told Hercules to get a party violates a right of another.
inside the police station. Inside the police station, Hercules Under Article 32(4) of the Civil Code,
asked the police officer, "Sir, may problema po ba?" Instead any public officer who violates the right
of replying, the police officer locked up Hercules inside the of a person to freedom from arbitrary
police station jail. or illegal detention shall be liable to the
latter for damages. The action to
If Hercules opts to file a civil action against the police recover damages is an independent
officer, will he have a cause of action? (3%) civil action. (Rule 2, Sec. l.of the Rules
of Court in relation to Art. 34 of the
Civil Code)
7 Landlord, a resident of Quezon City, entered into a lease The proper venue of the collection suit Civil Procedure Venue Venue of 2014
contract with Tenant, a resident of Marikina City, over a would be in Marikina City, where personal actions
residential house in Las Piñas City. The lease contract Tenant resides. Under the Rules of Civil
provided, among others, for a monthly rental of Procedure, venue in personal actions is
P25,000.00, plus ten percent (10%) interest rate in case of with the residence of either the
non-payment on its due date. Subsequently, Landlord plaintiff or the defendant, at the
migrated to the United States of America (USA) but granted plaintiff’s election. Since the Plaintiff
in favor of his sister Maria, a special power of attorney to does not reside in the Philippines,
manage the property and file and defend suits over the venue may be laid only in Marikina City
property rented out to Tenant. Tenant failed to pay the where the defendant Tenant resides.
rentals due for five (5) months. Maria asks your legal advice
on how she can expeditiously collect from Tenant the
unpaid rentals plus interests due.

Where is the proper venue of the judicial remedy which


you
recommended? (6%)
16 Prince Chong entered into a lease contract with King Kong No, the action will not be dismissible Civil Procedure Parties to civil Effect of death of 2014
over a commercial building where the former conducted his upon Prince Chong’s death during the actions party-litigant
hardware business. The lease contract stipulated, among pendency of the case.
others, a monthly rental of P50,000.00 for a four (4)-year
period commencing on January 1, 2010. On January 1, Under S20 R3, when the action is on a
2013, Prince Chong died. Kin Il Chong was appointed contractual money claim and the
administrator of the estate of Prince Chong, but the former defendant dies before entry of final
failed to pay the rentals for the months of January to June judgment, the action shall not be
2013 despite King Kong’s written demands. Thus, on July 1, dismissed but shall instead be allowed
2013, King Kong filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) an to continue until entry of final
action for rescission of contract with damages and payment judgment.
of accrued rentals as of June 30, 2013.
Here the action is on a contractual
If the rentals accrued during the lifetime of Prince Chong, money claim, that is, a claim for rentals
and King Kong also filed the complaint for sum of money based on a lease contract. Hence it
during that time, will the action be dismissible upon Prince shall be allowed to continue until final
Chong’s death during the pendency of the case? (4%) judgment. (S20 R3, S5 R86).
31 Mr. Humpty filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) a No, there is no violation of the rule Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2014
complaint against Ms. Dumpty for damages. The RTC, after against forum shopping. pleading
due proceedings, rendered a decision granting the
complaint and ordering Ms. Dumpty to pay damages to Mr. Forum shopping applies where two or
Humpty. Ms. Dumpty timely filed an appeal before the more initiatory pleadings were filed by
Court of Appeals (CA), questioning the RTC decision. the same party. This is discernible from
Meanwhile, the RTC granted Mr. Humpty’s motion for the use of the phrase “commenced any
execution pending appeal. Upon receipt of the RTC’s order action or filed any claim” in S5 R7.
granting execution pending appeal, Ms. Dumpty filed with
the CA another case, this time a special civil action for Here the first case involves the filing by
certiorari assailing said RTC order. Is there a violation of the Ms. Dumpty of a notice of appeal which
rule against forum shopping considering that two (2) is not an initiatory pleading. Hence
actions emanating from the same case with the RTC were there is no forum shopping.
filed by Ms. Dumpty with the CA? Explain. (4%)
2 Alfie Bravo filed with the Regional Trial Court of Caloocan, a If Charlie is declared in default, he has Civil Procedure Pleadings Effect of failure to 2013
complaint for a sum of money against Charlie Delta. The the following remedies to wit: plead
claim is for Php1.5Million. The complaint alleges that 1) he may, at any time after discovery
Charlie borrowed the amount from Alfie and duly executed of the default but before judgment, file
a promissory note as evidence of the loan. Charlie’s office a motion, under oath, to set aside the
secretary, Esther, received the summons at Charlie’s office. order of default on the ground that his
Charlie failed to file an answer within the required period, failure to answer was due to fraud,
and Alfie moved to declare Charlie in default and to be accident, mistake, or excusable neglect,
allowed to present evidence ex parte. Ten days later, and that he has a meritorious defense;
Charlie filed his verified answer, raising the defense of full 2) if judgment has already been
payment with interest. rendered when he discovered the
default, but before the same has
If declared in default, what can Charlie do to obtain relief? become final and executor, he may file
(4%) a motion for new trial under Section
1(a) of Rule 37:
3) if he discovered the default after the
judgment has become final and
executor, he may file a petition for
relief under Section 2 of Rule 38; and
4) he may also appeal from the
judgment rendered against him as
contrary to the evidence or to the law,
even if no petition to set aside the
order of default has been presented by
him. (B.D. Longspan Builders, Inc. vs.
R.S. Ampeloquio Realty Development,
G.R. No. 169919, September 11, 2009).
[Note: there are additional remedies to
address judgments by default: Motion
for Reconsideration (Rule 37),
Annulment of Judgment (Rule 47) and
Petition for Certiorari (Rule 65)].

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The court committed grave abuse of
discretion when it declared the
defending party in default despite the
latter‟s filing of an Answer. Thus, a
petition for certiorari under Rule 65 is
the proper remedy.
In San Pedro Cineplex Properties vs.
Heirs of Manuel Humada Enano, G.R.
No. 190754, November 17, 2010, the
Supreme Court held that where the
answer is filed beyond the
reglementary period but before the
defendant is declared in default and
there is no showing that defendant
intends to delay the case, the answer
should be admitted. Thus, it was error
to declare the defending party in
default after the Answer was filed (See
Sablas vs. Sablas, G.R. No. 144568, July
3, 2007).
After all, the defect in the service of
summons was cured by Charlie‟s filing
of a verified answer raising only the
defense of full payment. The belated
filing of verified Answer amounts to
voluntary submission to the jurisdiction
of the court and waiver of any defect in
the service of summons.
12 While leisurely walking along the street near her house in Patty may avail any of the following Civil Procedure Venue Venue of 2013
Marikina, Patty unknowingly stepped on a garden tool left remedies: personal actions
behind by CCC, a construction company based in Makati. a) She may file a complaint for
She lost her balance as a consequence and fell into an open damages arising from fault or
manhole. Fortunately, Patty suffered no major injuries negligence under the Rules on Small
except for contusions, bruises and scratches that did not Claims against CCC Company before
require any hospitalization. However, she lost selfesteem, the MTC of Marikina City where she
suffered embarrassment and ridicule, and had bouts of resides or Makati City where the
anxiety and bad dreams about the accident. She wants defendant corporation is holding office,
vindication for her uncalled for experience and hires you to at her option (A.M. No. 88-7-SC in
act as counsel for her and to do whatever is necessary to relation to Section 2, Rule 4, Rules of
recover at least Php100,000 for what she suffered. What Court).
action or actions may Patty pursue, against whom, where b) She may also file an action to
(court and venue), and under what legal basis? (7%) recover moral damages based on quasi-
delict under Article 2176 of the New
Civil Code. The law states that,
whoever by act or omission causes
damage to another, there being fault or
negligence is obliged to pay for the
damage done. Such fault or negligence,
if there is no pre-existing contractual
relation between the parties, is called a
quasi-delict.
Under Article 2217 of the New Civil
Code, moral damages include physical
suffering, mental anguish, fright,
serious anxiety, besmirched reputation,
wounded feelings, moral shock, social
humiliation, and similar injury. Though
incapable of pecuniary computation,
moral damages may be recovered if
they are the proximate result of the
defendant‟s wrongful act or omission.
Since moral damages are incapable of
pecuniary estimation, Patty should file
the action before the Regional Trial
Court of Marikina City where she
resides or Makati City, where the
defendant corporation is holding office,
at her option (Section 19(1), B.P. 129).
c) Patty can also file a civil action for
damages against the City of Marikina
for maintaining an open manhole
where she unfortunately fell. Under
article 2189 of the Civil Code,
provinces, cities, and municipalities
shall be liable for damages for the
death of, or injuries suffered by, any
person by reason of the defective
condition of roads, streets, bridges,
public buildings, and other public works
under their control or supervision. The
proper court having jurisdiction over
the case is at least Php 100,000 for as
long
as the aggregate of the claims for
damages does not exceed Php 400,000.
22 In a complaint filed by the plaintiff, what is the effect of the (D), Under Section 3 of Rule 9, if the Civil Procedure Pleadings Effect of failure to 2013
defendant’s failure to file an answer within the defending party fails to answer within plead
reglementary period? (1%) the time allowed, the court shall, upon
(A) The court is allowed to render judgment motu proprio motion of the claiming party with
in favor of the plaintiff. notice to the defending party, and
(B) The court motu proprio may declare the defendant in proof of such failure, declare the
default, but only after due notice to the defendant. defending party in default (Narciso vs.
(C) The court may declare the defendant in default but only Garcia, G.R. No. 196877, November 21,
upon motion of the plaintiff and with notice to the 2012, Abad J.).
defendant.
(D) The court may declare the defendant in default but only ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
upon motion of the plaintiff, with notice to the defendant, (E), D may not be the correct answer
and upon presentation of proof of the defendant’s failure because the Rule provides that if the
to answer. defending party fails to answer within
(E) The above choices are all inaccurate. the time allowed therefor, the court
shall, upon motion of the claiming
party with notice to the defending
party, and proof of such failure, declare
the defending party in default. Notably,
the Rule uses the word “shall and not
may.”
28 The signature of counsel in the pleading constitutes a (E), Section 3 of Rule 7 provides that Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2013
certification that __________. (1%) the signature of counsel constitutes a pleading
(A) both client and counsel have read the pleading, that to certificate by him that he has read the
the best of their knowledge, information and belief there pleadings; that to the best of his
are good grounds to support it, and that it is not interposed knowledge, information, and belief
for delay there is good ground to support it; and
(B) the client has read the pleading, that to the best of the that it is not interposed for delay.
client’s knowledge, information and belief, there are good
grounds to support it, and that it is not interposed for delay
(C) the counsel has read the pleading, that to the best of
the client’s knowledge, information and belief, there are
good grounds to support it, and that it is not interposed for
delay
(D) the counsel has read the pleading, that based on his
personal information, there are good grounds to support it,
and that it is not interposed for delay
(E) The above choices are not totally accurate.
40 Danny filed a complaint for damages against Peter. In the (C), (B), or (A), Under Section 5 of Rule Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment 2013
course of the trial, Peter introduced evidence on a matter 10 of the Rules of Civil Procedure,
not raised in the pleadings. Danny promptly objected on when issues not raised by the pleadings
the ground that the evidence relates to a matter not in are tried with the express or implied
issue. How should the court rule on the objection? (1%) consent of the parties they shall be
(A) The court must sustain the objection. treated in all respects as if they had
(B) The court must overrule the objection. been raised in the pleadings. Such
(C) The court, in its discretion, may allow amendment of amendment of the pleadings as may be
the pleading if doing so would serve the ends of substantial necessary to cause them to conform to
justice. the evidence and to raise these issues
(D) The court, in its discretion, may order that the may be made upon motion of any party
allegation in the pleadings which do not conform to the at any time, even after judgment; but
evidence presented be stricken out. failure to amend does not effect the
(E) The matter is subject to the complete discretion of the result of the trial of these issues. If
court. evidence is objected to at the trial on
the ground that it is not within the
issues made by the pleadings, the court
may allow the pleadings to be
amended and shall do so with liberality
if the presentation of the merits of the
action and the ends of substantial
justice will be served thereby. The
court may grant a continuance to
enable the amendment to be made.
The Court may sustain the objection
because the evidence introduced by
Danny is immaterial, being a matter
which was not raised as an issue in the
pleading.
On the other hand, the Court also
overrule the objection and allow an
amendment of the pleading if doing so
would serve the ends of justice.
7 A bought a Volvo Sedan from ABC Cars for P5.0M. ABC Cars, A can file an action for specific Civil Procedure Parties to civil Real parties-in- 2012
before delivering to A, had the car rust proofed and tinted performance and damages against ABC actions interest;
by XYZ Detailing. When delivered to A, the car's upholstery Cars since the damage to the Volvo indispensable
was found to b~ damaged. ABC Cars and XYZ Detailing both Sedan‟s upholstery was caused before parties;
deny any liability. Who can A sue and on what cause(s) of the delivery of the same to A, and representatives
action? Explain. (5%) therefore prior to the transfer of as parties;
ownership to the latter. (Article 1477, necessary parties;
New Civil Code). Under Article 1170 of indigent parties;
the New Civil Code, those who alternative
contravene the tenor of the obligation defendants
are liable for damages. Hence, an
action for specific performance against
ABC Corporation to deliver the agreed
Volvo Sedan in the contract, free from
any damage or defects, with
corresponding damages will lie against
ABC Cars.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
A can sue ABC Cars for specific
performance or rescission because the
former has contractual relations with
the latter.
17 Plaintiff files a request for admission and serves the same The Plaintiff should file a Motion for Civil Procedure Pleadings Effect of failure to 2012
on Defendant who fails, within the time prescribed by the Judgment on the Pleadings because the plead; Failure to
rules, to answer the request. Suppose the request for failure of the defendant to answer a plead defenses
admission asked for the admission of the entire material request for admission results to an and objections
allegations stated in the complaint, what should plaintiff implied admission of all the matters
do? (5%) which an admission is requested.
Hence, a motion for judgment on the
pleadings is the appropriate remedy
where the defendant is deemed to
have admitted the matters contained in
the Request for admission by the
plaintiff. (Rule 34 in connection with
Sec.2, Rule 26, Rules of Court).
32 In real actions, the docket and filing fees are based on: (c), Under Section 7, Rule 141 of the Civil Procedure Actions Personal actions 2012
Rules of Court, in cases involving and real actions
a. fair market value of the property. property, the fair market value of the
b. assessed value of the property. real property in litigation stated in the
c. BIR zonal value of the property. current tax declaration or current zonal
d. fair market value of the property and amount of valuation of the bureau of internal
damages claimed. revenue, whichever is higher, or if
there is none, the stated value of the
property in litigation or the value of the
personal property in litigation as
alleged by the claimant shall be basis of
the docket and filing fees. ( As
amended by A.M. 04-204-SC, August
16, 2004).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(b), In Siapno vs. Manalo, G.R. No.
132260, August 30, 2005, the Court
disregarded the title/denomination of
the plaintiff Manalo‟s amended
petition as one for Mandamus with
Revocation of Title and Damages; and
adjudged the same to be a real action,
the filing fees for which should have
been computed based on the assessed
value of the subject property or, if
there was none, the estimated value
thereof.
41 Being declared in default does not constitute a waiver of all (b), A party declared in default cannot Civil Procedure Pleadings Default ; Effect of 2012
rights. However, the following right is considered waived: take part in the trial but is nonetheless an order of
entitled to notices of subsequent default
a. be cited and called to testify as a witness proceedings. Thus, a party declared in
b. file a motion for new trial default is deemed to have waived his
c. participate in deposition taking of witnesses of adverse right to file a motion for new trial since
party he had no right to an old trial on the
d. file a petition for certiorari first place.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
NO CORRECT ANSWER. The Committee
may recommend that the examinee be
given full credit for any answer because
the question is very tricky.
A party declared in default is not
deemed to have waived any of the
abovementioned rights.
A party declared in default loses his
standing in Court. He cannot take part
in the trial but he is entitled to notices
of subsequent proceedings. (Section
3(a),
Rule 9, Rules of Court). When a
defendant is declared in default, he
does not waive any of the above-
mentioned rights.
A defendant may still be cited and
called to testify as a witness since he
will participate in the trial, not as a
party but merely as a witness. In fact, it
is not a right but rather an obligation of
a defendant cited and called to testify
as a witness to so appear in court. He
may also participate in the deposition
taking of witnesses of the adverse party
because the same is at the instance of
the said adverse party and may not yet
be considered as part of the trial. The
defendant cannot also be said to have
waived his right to file a motion for
new trial since this is a remedy
available before finality of a judgment
declaring a party in default (BD Long
Span Builders vs. R.S. Ampeloquio
Realty Development, Inc., G.R.
No.169919, September 11, 2009).
Moreover, a petition for certiorari
under Rule 65 is not considered waived
because it is still an available remedy, if
the declaration of default was tainted
with grave abuse of discretion.
In Martinez vs. Republic, G.R. No.
160895, October 30, 2006, 506 SCRA
134, the Supreme Court has clearly
discussed the remedies of a party
declared in default in light of the 1964
and 1997 Rules of Court and a number
of jurisprudence applying and
interpreting said rules. Citing Lina vs.
Court of Appeals, No. L-63397, April 9,
1985, 135 SCRA 637, the High Court
enumerated the following remedies, to
wit: (a) The defendant in default may,
at any time after discovery thereof and
before judgment, file a motion, under
oath, to set aside the order of default
on the ground that his failure to answer
was due to fraud, accident, mistake, or
excusable neglect, and that he has
meritorious defenses; (Sec.3, Rule 18,
Rules of Court); (b) If the judgment has
already been rendered when the
defendant discovered the default, but
before the same has become final and
executor, he may file a motion for new
trial under Section 1(a) of Rule 37,
Rules of Court; (c) If the defendant
discovered the default after the
judgment has become final and
executor, he may file a petition for
relief under Section 2 of Rule 38, Rules
of Court; and (d) He may also appeal
from the judgment rendered against
him as contrary to the evidence or to
the law, even if no petition to set aside
the order of default has been
presented by him. (Rule 41, Sec.2,
Rules of Court) (Rebecca T. Arquero vs.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 168053,
Sept. 21, 2011, Peralta, J.).

53 When a party or counsel willfully or deliberately commits (c), If the acts of the party or his Civil Procedure Pleadings Verification and 2012
forum shopping, the initiatory pleading may: counsel clearly constitute wilful and certification
deliberate forum shopping, the same against forum
a. be cured by amendment of the complaint. shall be ground for summary dismissal shopping
b. upon motion, be dismissed with prejudice. with prejudice and shall constitute
c. be summarily dismissed with prejudice as it may direct contempt, as well as a cause for
constitute direct contempt. administrative sanctions (Rule 7, Sec.5,
d. be stricken from the record. Rules of Court).
58 Atty. X fails to serve personally a copy of his motion to (c), Since the office and place of Civil Procedure Pleadings Filinf and service 2012
Atty. Y because the office and residence of Atty. Y and the residence of the Atty. X and the latter‟s of pleadings
latter's client changed and no forwarding addresses were clinet changed and no forwarding
given. Atty. X's remedy is to: address were given, Atty. X can deliver
a. Serve by registered mail; a copy of the motion by way of
b. Serve by publication; substituted service, to the clerk of
c. Deliver copy of the motion to the clerk of court with court with proof of failure to serve the
proof of failure to serve; motion, both by way of personal
d. Certify in the motion that personal service and through service or service by mail. (Rule 13, Sec.
mail was impossible. 8, Rules of Court).
66 The following are accurate statements on joinder of causes (b), The rule on joinder of actions under Civil Procedure Cause of action Joinder and mis- 2012
of action, except: Section 5, Rule 2 of the 1997 Rules of joinder of causes
Civil Procedure, as amended, requires of action
a. joinder of actions avoids multiplicity of suits. that the joinder shall ot include special
b. joinder of actions may include special civil actions. civil actions governed by special rules.
c. joinder of causes of action is permissive. (Roman Catholic Archbishop of San
d. the test of jurisdiction in case of money claims in a Fernando Pampanga vs. Fernando
joinder of causes of act1on, is the "totality rule". Soriano Jr., et al., G.R. No. 153829,
August 17, 2011, VIllarama, Jr., J.).
75 Atty. A drafts a pleading for his client 8 wherein B admits (a), Pleadings are defined as written Civil Procedure Pleadings Kinds of pleadings 2012
certain facts prejudicial to his case. The pleading was never statements of the respective claims and
filed but was signed by Atty. A. Opposing counsel got hold defenses of the parties submitted to
of the pleading and presents the same in court. Which the court for appropriate judgment.
statement is the most accurate? (Rule 6, Sec.1, Rules of Court). Filing is
the act of presenting the pleading or
a. The prejudicial statements are not admissible because other paper to the clerk of court. (Rule
the unfiled document is not considered a pleading. 13, Sec.2, Rules of Court). Since Atty. A
b. The prejudicial statements are not admissible because and his client B did not file the
the client did not sign the pleading. pleading, and it was merely the
c. The prejudicial statements are not admissible because opposing counsel which presented the
these were not made by the client in open court. same in court, it should not be
d. The prejudicial statements are not admissible because considered to have been filed at all,
these were made outside the proceedings. and shall not prejudice Atty. A and his
client B. After all, no person may be
prejudiced by the acts of unauthorized
strangers.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(d), The Committee considers this as an
alternative answer for a more liberal
view.
86 Leave of court is always necessary in: (d), A third party complaint is a claim Civil Procedure Pleadings Kinds of pleadings 2012
that a defending party may, with leave
a. a demurrer to evidence in a civil case. of court, file against a person not a
b. a demurrer to evidence in a criminal case. party to the action, called the third
c. motion to amend a complaint. party defendant, for contribution,
d. third party complaint. indemnity, subrogation or any other
relief, in respect of his opponent‟s
claim. (Rule 6, Sec. 11, Rules of Court).
in a third party complaint, leave of
court is always necessary.
91 The mortgage contract between X, who resides in Manila, (a), The rules on venue of actions are Civil Procedure Venue Effects of 2012
and Y, who resides in Naga, covering land in Quezon merely procedural in character and can stipulations on
provides that any suit arising from the agreement may be be a subject of stipulation. Where the venue
filed "nowhere else but in a Makati court". Y must thus sue parties have validly agreed in writing
only in: before the filing of the action on the
exclusive venue of the action, the suit
a. Makati; cannot be filed anywhere other than
b. Makati and/or Naga; the stipulated venue. (Rule 4, Sec. 4,
c. Quezon and/or Makati; Rules of Court). Since the stipulation
d. Naga. between X and Y in the mortgage
contract is mandatory and restrictive in
character, the venue of the action is
only in Makati City.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: None of the
above. The venue of the action should
only be Quezon City, the place where
the real property is located.
The rules on venue do not apply to
actions involving a mortgage. In Ochoa
vs. Chinabank, G.R. No. 192877, March
23, 2011, the Supreme Court held that
the exclusive venue of Makati City, as
stipulated by the parties and
sanctioned by Section 4, Rule 4 of the
Rules of Court, cannot be made to
apply to the Petition for Extrajudicial
Foreclosure filed by respondent bank
because the provisions of Rule 4
pertain to venue of actions, which an
extrajudicial foreclosure is not. There is
no reason to depart from the doctrinal
pronouncement of the Supreme Court.
96 A judgment by default can be issued despite an Answer (c), If a party or an officer or managing Civil Procedure Pleadings Default 2012
being filed in: agent of a party wilfully fails to appear
before the officer who is to take his
a. annulment of marriage. deposition, after being served with a
b. legal separation. proper notice, or fails to serve answers
c. cases where a party willfully fails to appear before the to interrogatories submitted under
officer who is to take his deposition. Rule 25 after proper service of such
d. declaration of nullity of marriage. interrogatories, the court on motion
and notice, may strike out all or any
part of any pleading of the party, or
dismiss the action or proceeding or any
part thereof, or enter a judgment by
default against the party, and in its
discretion, order him to pay reasonable
expenses incurred by the other,
including attorney‟s fees. (Rule 29,
Sec.5, Rules of Court). hence, even if an
Answer was filed by a defendant, a
judgment by default can still be issued
where a party wilfully fails to appear
before the officer who is to take his
deposition.
In Arellano vs. Court of First Instance of
Sorsogon, Branch I, 65 SCRA 46, the
Supreme Court sustained the order of
dismissal for failure of respondent to
serve any answer to petitioner
Arellano‟s Interrogatories. The
dismissal was based on Section 5 of
Rule 29 which provides that if a party
fails to serve answers to interrogatories
submitted under Rule 25, after proper
service of such interrogatories, the
Court on motion and notice may
dismiss the action or render judgment
by default even without prior order to
serve answer.
100 A court can motu proprio dismiss a case on the following (b), A court cannot motu propio dismiss Civil Procedure Pleadings Effect of failure to 2012
grounds, except : a case on the ground of lack of plead
jurisdiction over the parties because
a. failure to prosecute; the objection on the said ground can be
b. lack of jurisdiction over the parties; waived by the failure of the defendant
c. litis pendentia; to raise the same in his motion to
d. prescription. dismiss
or in his answer as affirmative defense.
(Rule 9, Sec.1, Rules of Court).
104 A defendant declared in default may, after judgment but (c), A defendant declared in default Civil Procedure Pleadings Relief from an 2012
before finality, file a: may after judgment but before finality order of default
file a Motion for Reconsideration in
a. Petition for Relief from Judgment; order to give the Court an opportunity
b. Petition for Certiorari; to rectify its mistakes and set aside the
c. Motion for Reconsideration; previous judgment by default before it
d. Motion to Set Aside Order of Default. attains finality.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
A defendant declared in default may,
after judgment but before finality, file a
Motion for New Trial. It is well-settled
that a defendant who has been
declared in default has the following
remedies, to wit: (1) he may, at any
time after discovery of the default but
before judgment, file a motion, under
oath, to set aside the order of default
on the ground that his failure to answer
was due to fraud, accident, mistake or
excusable neglect, and that he has a
meritorious defense; (2) if judgment
has already been rendered when he
discovered the default, but before the
same has become final and executor,
he may file a motion for new trial
under Section 1(a) of Rule 37; (3) if he
discovered the default after the
judgment has become final and
executor, he may file a petition for
relief under Section 2 of Rule 38; and
(4) he may also appeal from the
judgment rendered against him as
contrary to the evidence or to the law,
even if no petition to set
aside the order of default has been
presented by him. (B.D. long Span
Builders vs. R.S. Ampeloquio Realty
Development, Inc., G.R. No. 169919,
September 11, 2009).
105 With leave of court, a party may amend his pleading if: (d), When issues not raised by the Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment 2012
pleadings are tried with the express or
a. there is yet no responsive pleading served. implied consent of the parties, they
b. the amendment is unsubstantial. shall be treated in all respects as if they
c. the amendment involves clerical errors of defect in the had been raised in the pleadings. Such
designation of a party. amendment of the pleadings as may be
d. the amendment is to conform to the evidence. necessary to cause them to conform to
the evidence and to raise these issues
may be made upon motion of any party
at any time, even after judgment; but
failure to amend does not affect the
result of the trial of these issues. (Rule
10, Sec. 5, Rules of Court).
114 X filed a complaint with the RTC through ABC, a private (b), Under the Riles, the manner of Civil Procedure Pleadings Filinf and service 2012
letter forwarding agency. The date of filing of the complaint filing of pleadings, appearances, of pleadings
shall be: motions, notices, judgments and all
other papers shall only be made by
a. the date stamped by ABC on the envelope containing the presenting the original copies thereof,
complaint. plainly indicated as such, personally to
b. the date of receipt by the Clerk of Court. the clerk of court or bny sending them
c. the date indicated by the receiving clerk of ABC. by registered mail. (Rule 13, Sec.3).
d. the date when the case is officially raffled. Nonetheless, if the complaint was filed
with the court through a private letter-
forwarding agency, the established rule
is that the date of delivery of pleadings
to a private letter-forwarding agency is
not to be considered as the date of
filing in court, but rather the date of
actual receipt by the court, is deemed
to be the date of filing of the pleading.
(Benguet Electric Cooperative, Inc. vs.
National Labor Relations Commission,
G.R. No. 89070, May 18, 1992). Hence,
the date of the actual receipt by the
court is considered as the date of filing
of the complaint.
126 A certificate against ForumShopping is not required in: (b), A certification against forum Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2012
shopping is not required in an pleading
a. petitions for probate of will. application for search warrant. The
b. application for search warrant. Rules of Court, require only initiatory
c. complaint-in-intervention. pleading to be accompanied with a
d. petition for Writ of Kalikasan. certificate of non-forum shopping
omitting any mention of “applications”
as in Supreme Court No. 04-94. Hence,
the absence of such certification will
not result in the dismissal of the
application for search warrant. (Savage
vs. Judge A.B. Taypin, G.R. No. 134217,
May 11, 2000).
6 Gary who lived in Taguig borrowed P1 million from Rey who B. in Taguig or Makati at the option of Civil Procedure Venue Venue of 2011
lived in Makati under a contract of loan that fixed Makati as Gary since it is a personal injury action. personal actions
the venue of any action arising from the contract.
Gary had already paid the loan but Rey kept on sending him
letters of demand for some balance. Where is the venue of
the action for harassment that Gary wants to file against
Rey?

a. In Makati since the intent of the party is to make it the


venue of any action between them whether based on the
contract or not.
b. In Taguig or Makati at the option of Gary since it is a
personal injury action.
c. In Taguig since Rey received the letters of demand there.
d. In Makati since it is the venue fixed in their contract.
14 The right to intervene is not absolute. In general, it B. It would enlarge the issues and Civil Procedure Intervention Requisites for 2011
CANNOT be allowed where expand the scope of the remedies. intervention

a. the intervenor has a common interest with any of the


parties.
b. it would enlarge the issues and expand the scope of the
remedies.
c. the intervenor fails to put up a bond for the protection of
the other parties.
d. the intervenor has a stake in the property subject of the
suit.
19 Gerry sued XYZ Bus Co. and Rico, its bus driver, for injuries A. No, since the court should have tried Civil Procedure Pleadings Default 2011
Gerry suffered when their bus ran off the road and hit him. the case against both defendants upon
Of the two defendants, only XYZ Bus Co. filed an answer, the bus company's answer.
alleging that its bus ran off the road because one of its
wheels got caught in an open manhole, causing the bus to
swerve without the driver's fault. Someone had stolen the
manhole cover and the road gave no warning of the danger
it posed. On Gerry's motion and over the objection of XYZ
Bus Co., the court declared Rico, the bus driver, in default
and rendered judgment ordering him to pay P50,000 in
damages to Gerry. Did the court act correctly?

a. No, since the court should have tried the case against
both defendants upon the bus company's answer.
b. No, the court should have dropped Rico as defendant
since the moneyed defendant is the bus company.
c. Yes, the court can, under the rules, render judgment
against the defendant declared in default
d. Yes, since, in failing to answer, Rico may be deemed to
have admitted the allegations in the complaint.
25 A sued B for ejectment Pending trial, B died, survived by his A. Yes, because the case survived B's Civil Procedure Parties to civil Effect of death of 2011
son, C. No substitution of party defendant was made. Upon death and the effect of final judgment actions party-litigant
finality of the judgment against B, may the same be in an ejectment case binds his
enforced against C? successorin-in-interest

a. Yes, because the case survived B’s death and the effect
of final judgment in an ejectment case binds his successors
in-interest
b. No, because C was denied due process.
c. Yes, because the negligence of B's counsel in failing to
ask for substitution, should not prejudice A.
d. No, because the action did not survive B's death.
33 A sued B in the RTC of Quezon City, joining two causes of B. No, since causes of action pertaining Civil Procedure Cause of action Joinder and mis- 2011
action: for partition of real property and breach of contract to different venues may be joined In joinder of causes
with damages. Both parties reside in Quezon City but the the RTC. If one of die causes of action of action
real property is in Manila. May the case be dismissed for falls within its jurisdiction.
improper venue?

a. Yes, since causes of action pertaining to different venues


may not be joined in one action.
b. No, since causes of action pertaining to different venues
may be joined In the RTC. If one of die causes of action falls
within its jurisdiction.
c. Yes, because special civil action may not be joined with
an ordinary civil action.
d. No, since plaintiff may unqualifiedly join in one
complaint as many causes of action as he has against
opposing party.
47 Defendant Dante said in his answer: "1. Plaintiff Perla D. a permissive counterclaim Civil Procedure Pleadings Kinds of pleadings 2011
claims that defendant Dante owes her P4,000 on the
mobile phone that she sold him; 2. But Perla owes Dante
P6,000 for the dent on his car that she borrowed." How
should the court treat the second statement?

a. A cross claim
b. A compulsory counterclaim
c. A third party complaint
d. A permissive counterclaim
51 Ranger Motors filed a replevin suit against Bart to recover D. No, since having been allowed to Civil Procedure Intervention Intervention 2011
possession of a car that he mortgaged to it Bart disputed Intervene, the intervenor became a
the claim. Meantime, the court allowed, with no opposition party to the action, entitled to have the
from issue it raised tried and decided.
the parties, Midway Repair Shop to intervene with its claim
against Bart for unpaid repair bills. On subsequent motion
of Ranger Motors and Bart, the court dismissed the
complaint as well as Midway Repair Shop's intervention.
Did the court act correctly?

a. No, since the dismissal of the intervention bars the right


of Bart to file a separate action.
b. Yes, intervention is merely collateral to the principal
action and not an independent proceeding.
c. Yes, the right of the intervenor is merely in aid of the
right of the original party, which in this case had ceased to
exist
d. No, since having been allowed to Intervene, the
intervenor became a party to the action, entitled to have
the issue it raised tried and decided.
56 A complaint without the required "verification" A. shall be treated as unsigned. Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2011
pleading
a. shall be treated as unsigned.
b. lacks a jurisdictional requirement
c. is a sham pleading.
d. is considered not filed and should be expunged.

63 In a judicial foreclosure proceeding, under which of the C. If the mortgagor is a third party who Civil Procedure Pleadings Foreclosure of 2011
following instances is the court NOT ALLOWED to render is not solidarity liable with the debtor. real estate
deficiency judgment for the plaintiff? mortgage;
Deficiency
a. If the mortgagee is a banking institution. judgment
b. if upon the mortgagor’s death during the proceeding, the
mortgagee submits his claim in the estate proceeding.
c. If the mortgagor is a third party who is not solidarity
liable with the debtor.
d. If the mortgagor is a non-resident person and cannot be
found in the Philippines.
64 In which of the following cases is the plaintiff the real party C. Assignee of the lessor in an action Civil Procedure Parties to civil Real parties-in- 2011
in interest? for unlawful detainer actions interest

a. A creditor of one of the co-owners of a parcel of land,


suing for partition
b. An agent acting in his own name suing for the benefit of
a disclosed principal
c. Assignee of the lessor in an action for unlawful detainer
d. An administrator suing for damages arising from the
death of the decedent
71 Unexplained or unjustified non-joinder in the Complaint of D. waiver of plaintiff s right against the Civil Procedure Parties to civil Misjoinder and 2011
a necessary party despite court order results in unpleaded necessary party. actions non-joinder of
parties
a. the dismissal of the Complaint.
b. suspension of proceedings.
c. contempt of court
d. waiver of plaintiff s right against the unpleaded
necessary party.
78 Which of the following correctly states the rule on B. In judicial foreclosure, an order of Civil Procedure Pleadings Foreclosure of 2011
foreclosure of mortgages? confirmation is necessary to vest all real estate
rights in the purchaser. mortgage; Judicial
a. The rule on foreclosure of real estate mortgage is foreclosure
suppletorily applicable to extrajudicial foreclosures. versus
b. In judicial foreclosure, an order of confirmation is extrajudicial
necessary to vest all rights in the purchaser. foreclosure
c. There is equity of redemption in extra-judicial
foreclosure.
d. A right of redemption by the judgment obligor exists in
judicial foreclosure.
93 Which of the following stipulations in a contract will C. Venue in case of dispute between Civil Procedure Venue effects of 2011
supersede the venue for actions that the rules of civil the parties to this contract shall solely stipulations on
procedure fix? be in the proper courts of Quezon City. venue

a. In case of litigation arising from this contract of sale, the


preferred venue shall be in the proper courts of Makati.
b. Should the real owner succeed in recovering his stolen
car from buyer X, the latter shall have recourse under this
contract to seller Y exclusively before the proper Cebu City
court.
c. Venue in case of dispute between the parties to this
contract shall solely be in the proper courts of Quezon City.
d. Any dispute arising from this contract of sale may be filed
in Makati or Quezon City.
94 Allan was riding a passenger jeepney driven by Ben that D. Sue both Ben and Cesar as Civil Procedure Parties to civil alternative 2011
collided with a car driven by Cesar, causing Allan injury. Not alternative defendants. actions defendants
knowing who was at fault, what is the best that Allan can
do?

a. File a tort action against Cesar.


b. Await a judicial finding regarding who was at fault
c. Sue Ben for breach of contract of carriage.
d. Sue both Ben and Cesar as alternative defendants.
98 Plaintiff Manny said in his complaint: “3. On March 1,2001 C. No, since it fails to set forth the Civil Procedure Pleadings Allegations in a 2011
defendant Letty borrowed P1million from plaintiff Manny matters defendant relied upon in pleading
and made a promise to pay the loan within six months." In support of her denial.
her answer, Letty alleged: "Defendant Letty specifically
denies the allegations in paragraph 3 of the complaint that
she borrowed P1 million from plaintiff Manny on March 1,
2001 and made a promise to pay the loan within six
months." Is Letty’s denial sufficient?

a. Yes, since it constitutes specific denial of the loan.


b. Yes, since it constitutes positive denial of the existence of
the loan.
c. No, since it fails to set forth the matters defendant relied
upon in support of her denial.
d. No, since she fails to set out in par. 2 of her answer her
special and affirmative defenses.
6 On August 13, 2008, A, as shipper and consignee, loaded on The contention of B is correct: A‟s Civil Procedure Pleadings Allegations in a 2010
the M/V Atlantis in Legaspi City 100,000 pieces of century contention is wrong. It was A who pleading
eggs. The shipment arrived in Manila totally damaged on pleaded the Bill of Lading as an
August 14, 2008. A filed before the Metropolitan Trial Court actionable document where the
(MeTC) of Manila a complaint against B Super Lines, Inc. (B stipulation limits B‟s liability to A to
Lines), owner of the M/V Atlantis, for recovery of damages P10,000.00 only. The issue raised by B
amounting to P167,899. He attached to the complaint the does not go against or impugn the
Bill of Lading. genuineness and due execution of the
Bill of Lading as an actionable
The MeTC denied the Motion in question A. B Lines thus document pleaded by A, but invokes
filed an Answer raising the defense that under the Bill of the binding effect of said stipulation.
Lading it issued to A, its liability was limited to P10,000. The oath is not required of B, because
the issue raised by the latter does not
At the pre-trial conference, B Lines defined as one of the impugn the genuineness and due
issues whether the stipulation limiting its liability to execution of the Bill of Lading.
P10,000 binds A. A countered that this was no longer in
issue as B Lines had failed to deny under oath the Bill of
Lading. Which of the parties is correct? Explain. (3%)
9 X was driving the dump truck of Y along Cattleya Street in No, V is not guilty of forum shopping Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2010
Sta. Maria, Bulacan. Due to his negligence, X hit and injured because the case in Sta. Maria, pleading
V who was crossing the street. Lawyer L, who witnessed the Bulacan, is a criminal action filed in the
incident, offered his legal services to V. name of the People of the Philippines,
V, who suffered physical injuries including a fractured wrist where civil liability arising from the
bone, underwent surgery to screw a metal plate to his wrist crime is deemed also instituted
bone. therewith; whereas the case filed in
Urdaneta, Pangasinan, is a civil action
On complaint of V, a criminal case for Reckless Imprudence for quasi-delict in the name of V and
Resulting in Serious Physical Injuries was filed against X against both X and Y for all damages
before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Sta. Maria. Atty. caused by X and Y to V, which may be
L, the private prosecutor, did not reserve the filing of a beyond the jurisdiction of MTC. Hence,
separate civil action. the tests of forum shopping, which is
res adjudicate or litis pendencia, do not
V subsequently filed a complaint for Damages against X and obtain here.
Y before the Regional Trial Court of Pangasinan in Urdaneta Moreover, substantive law (Art. 33,
where he resides. In his "Certification Against Forum Civil Code) and Sec. 3, Rule 111,
Shopping," V made no mention of the pendency of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure,
criminal case in Sta. Maria. expressly authorize the filing such
action for damages entirely separate
Is V guilty of forum shopping? (2%) and distinct from the criminal action.
11 X was driving the dump truck of Y along Cattleya Street in No, X may not move for dismissal of the Civil Procedure Parties to civil Misjoinder and 2010
Sta. Maria, Bulacan. Due to his negligence, X hit and injured civil action for damages on the actions non-joinder of
V who was crossing the street. Lawyer L, who witnessed the contention that Y is an indispensable parties
incident, offered his legal services to V. party who should be impleaded. Y is
V, who suffered physical injuries including a fractured wrist not an indispensable party but only
bone, underwent surgery to screw a metal necessary party. Besides, nonjoinder
plate to his wrist bone. and misjoinder of parties is not a
On complaint of V, a criminal case for Reckless Imprudence ground for dismissal of actions (Rule 3,
Resulting in Serious Physical Injuries was filed against X Sec. 11, Rules of Court).
before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Sta. Maria. Atty.
L, the private prosecutor, did not reserve the filing of a
separate civil action.
V subsequently filed a complaint for Damages against X and
Y before the Regional Trial Court of Pangasinan in Urdaneta
where he resides. In his "Certification Against Forum
Shopping," V made no mention of the pendency of the
criminal case in Sta. Maria.

Suppose only X was named as defendant in the complaint


for damages, may he move for the dismissal of the
complaint for failure of V to implead Y as an indispensable
party? (2%)
17 Antique dealer Mercedes borrowed P1,000,000 from Mercedes‟ Motion for Reconsideration Civil Procedure Pleadings Kinds of pleadings 2010
antique collector Benjamin. Mercedes issued a postdated is impressed with merit: the trial courts
check in the same amount to Benjamin to cover the debt. should not have dismissed her
counterclaim despite the dismissal of
On the due date of the check, Benjamin deposited it but it the Complaint.
was dishonored. As despite demands, Mercedes failed to Since it was the plaintiff (Benjamin)
make good the check, Benjamin filed in January 2009 a who moved for the dismissal of his
complaint for collection of sum of money before the RTC of Complaint, and at a time when the
Davao. defendant (Mercedes) had already filed
her Answer thereto and with
Mercedes filed in February 2009 her Answer with counterclaim, the dismissal of the
Counterclaim, alleging that before the filing of the case, she counterclaim without conformity of the
and Benjamin had entered into a dacion en pagoagreement defendant-counterclaimant. The
in which her vintage P1,000,000 Rolex watch which was Revised Rules of Court now provides in
taken by Benjamin for sale on commission was applied to Rule 17, Sec. 2 thereof that “If a
settle her indebtedness; and that she incurred expenses in counterclaim has been pleaded by a
defending what she termed a "frivolous lawsuit." She defendant prior to the service upon
accordingly prayed for P50,000 damages. him of the plaintiff‟s motion for
dismissal, the dismissal shall be limited
Benjamin soon after moved for the dismissal of the case. to the complaint. The dismissal shall be
The trial court accordingly dismissed the complaint. And it without prejudice to the right of the
also dismissed the Counterclaim. defendant to prosecute his
counterclaim x x x x.”
Mercedes moved for a reconsideration of the dismissal of
the Counterclaim. Pass upon Mercedes’ motion. (3%)
3 TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the statement is true, or FALSE. A suit for injunction is an action Civil Procedure Actions Actions in rem, in 2009
FALSE if the statement is false. Explain your answer in not in personam. In the early case of personam and
more than two (2) sentences. (5%) Auyong Hian vs. Court of Tax Appeals quasi in rem
[59 SCRA 110 [1974]), it was held that a
A suit for injunction is an action in rem. restraining order like an injunction,
operates upon a person. It is granted in
the exercise of equity of jurisdiction
and has no in rem effect to invalidate
an act done in contempt of an order of
the court except where by statutory
authorization, the decree is so framed
as to act in rem on property. (Air
Materiel Wing Savings and Loan
Association, Inc. vs. manay, 535 SCRA
356 [2007]).
7 Angelina sued Armando before the Regional Trial Court No, the answer would not be the same. Civil Procedure Venue Venue of real 2009
(RTC) of Manila to recover the ownership and possession of The foreclosure action should be actions
two parcels of land; one situated in Pampanga, and the brought in the proper court of the
other in Bulacan. province where the land or any part
thereof is situated, either in Pampanga
Will your answer be the same if the action was for or in Bulacan. Only one foreclosure
foreclosure of the mortgage over the two parcels of land? action need be filed unless each parcel
Why or why not? (2%) of land is covered by distinct mortgage
contract. In foreclosure suit, the cause
of action is for the violation of the
terms and conditions of the mortgage
contract; hence, one foreclosure suit
per mortgage contract violated is
necessary.
10 Amorsolo, a Filipino citizen permanently residing in New The third ground raised questioning the Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2009
York City, filed with the RTC of Lipa City a complaint for validity of the verification and pleading
Rescission of Contract of Sale of Land against Brigido, a certification of non-forum shopping for
resident of Barangay San Miguel, Sto. Tomas, Batangas. The lack of certification from the Philippine
subject property, located in Barangay Talisay, Lipa City, has Consulate in New York, authenticating
an assessed value of 19,700. Appended to the complaint is that Mr. Brown is duly authorized to
Amorsolo’s verification and certification of non-forum notarize the document, is likewise
shopping executed in New York City, duly notarized by Mr. without merit. The required
Joseph Brown, Esq., a notary public in the State of New certification alluded to, pertains to
York. Brigod filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the official acts, or records of official
following grounds: bodies, tribunals, and public officers,
whether of the Philippines or of a
The verification and certification of non-forum shopping are foreign country: the requirement in
fatally defective because there is no accompanying Sec. 24, Rule 132 of the 1997 Rules
certification issued by the Philippine Consulate in New York, refers only to paragraph (a) of Sec. 29
authenticating that Mr. Brown is duly authorized to which does not cover notarial
notarize the document. (3%) Rule on the foregoing grounds documents. It is enough that the notary
with reasons. public who notarized the verification
and certification of non-forum
shopping is clothed with authority to
administer oath in that State or foreign
country.
12 Frank and Gina were married on June 12, 1987 in Manila. No, the petition for Declaration of Civil Procedure Actions Civil actions 2009
Barely a year after the wedding, Frank exhibited a violent Presumptive Death provided in Art. 41 versus special
temperament, forcing Gina, for reasons of personal safety, of the “Family Code” is not the special proceedings
to live with her parents. A year thereafter, Gina found proceeding governing absentees under
employment as a domestic helper in Singapore, where she Rule 107 of the Rules of Court whose
worked for ten consecutive years. All the time she was rules of procedure will not be followed
abroad, Gina had absolutely no communications with (Republic vs. C.A., 458 SCRA [2005]).
Frank, nor did she hear any news about him. While in Said petition for Declaration
Singapore, Gina met and fell in love with Willie. On July 4, ofPresumptive Death under Article 41
2007, Gina filed a petition with the RTC of manila to declare of the Family Code is a summary
Frank presumptively dead, so that she could marry Willie. proceeding, authorized for purposes
The RTC granted Gina’s petition. The office of the Solicitor only of remarriage of the present
General (OSG) filed a notice of Appeal with the RTC, stating spouse, to avoid incurring the crime of
that it was appealing the decision of the Court of Appeals bigamy. Nonetheless, it is in the nature
on questions of fact and law. of a special proceeding, being an
application to establish a status or a
Is a petition for declaration of Presumptive Death a special particular fact in court.
proceeding? (2%)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
A petition for declaration of
presumptive death may be considered
a special proceeding, because it is so
classified in the Rules of Court (Rule
107, Rules of Court), as differentiated
from an ordinary action which is
adversarial. It is a mere application or
proceeding to establish the status of a
party or a particular fact, to viz: that a
person has been unheard of for a long
time and under such circumstance that
he may be presumed dead.
21 Modesto sued Ernesto for a sum of money, claiming that Modesto‟s motion for judgment on the Civil Procedure Pleadings Allegations in a 2009
the latter owed him P1-million, evidenced by a promissory pleadings should be denied. While it is pleading
note, quoted and attached to the complaint. In his answer true that under the actionable
with counterclaim, Ernesto alleged that Modesto coerced document rule, Ernesto‟s failure to
him into signing the promissory note, but that it is Modesto deny under oath the promissory note in
who really owes him P1.5-million. Modesto filed an answer his answer amounted to an implied
to Ernesto's counterclaim admitting that he owed Ernesto, admission of its genuineness and due
but only in the amount of P0.5-million. At the pre-trial, execution, his allegation in his answer
Modesto marked and identified Ernesto's promissory note. that he was coerced into signing the
He also marked and identified receipts covering payments promissory note tendered an issue
he made to Ernesto, to the extent of P0.5-million, which which should be tried. The issue of
Ernesto did not dispute. coercion is not inconsistent with the
due execution and genuineness of the
After pre-trial, Modesto filed a motion for judgment on the instrument. Thus, Ernesto‟s failure to
pleadings, while Ernesto filed a motion for summary deny the genuineness of the
judgment on his counterclaim. Resolve the two motions promissory note cannot be considered
with reasons. (5%) a waiver to raise the issue that he was
coerced in signing the same. Said claim
of coercion may also be proved as an
exception to the Parol Evidence Rule.

On the other hand, Ernesto‟s motion


for summary judgment may be
granted. Modesto‟s answer to
Ernesto‟s counterclaim – that he owed
the latter a sum less than what was
claimed – amounted to an admission of
a material fact and if the amount
thereof could summarily be proved by
affidavits,
deposition, etc., without the need of
going to trial, then no genuine issue of
fact exists.
22 Upon termination of the pre-trial, the judge dictated the Depending on the merit of the issue Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment 2009
pre-trial order in the presence of the parties and their sought to be brought in by the
counsel, reciting what had transpired and defining three (3) amendment, the motion to amend may
issues to be tried. (a) If, immediately upon receipt of his be granted upon due hearing. It is a
copy of the pre-trial order, plaintiff’s counsel should move policy of the Rules that parties should
for its amendment to include a fourth (4th) triable issue be afforded reasonable opportunity to
which he allegedly inadvertently failed to mention when bring about a complete determination
the judge dictated the order. of the controversy between them,
consistent with substantial justice.
Should the motion to amend be granted? Reasons. (2%) With this end in view, the amendment
before trial may be granted to prevent
manifest injustice. The matter is
addressed to the sound and judicious
discretion of the trial court.
23 Upon termination of the pre-trial, the judge dictated the The motion may be denied since trial Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment 2009
pre-trial order in the presence of the parties and their had already commenced and two
counsel, reciting what had transpired and defining three (3) witnesses for the plaintiff had already
issues to be tried. (a) If, immediately upon receipt of his testified. Courts are required to issue
copy of the pre-trial order, plaintiff’s counsel should move pre-trial Order after the pre-trial
for its amendment to include a fourth (4th) triable issue conference has been terminated and
which he allegedly inadvertently failed to mention when before trial begins, precisely because
the judge dictated the order. the reason for such Order is to define
the course of the action during the
Suppose trial had already commenced and after the trial. Where trial had already
plaintiff’s second witness had testified, the defendant’s commenced, more so the adverse party
counsel moves for had already presented witnesses, to
the amendment of the pre-trial order to include a fifth (5th) allow an amendment would be unfair
triable issue vital to his client’s defense. Should the motion to the party who had already presented
be granted over the objection of plaintiff’s counsel? his witnesses. The amendment would
Reasons. (3%) simply render nugatory the reason for
or purpose of the pre-trial Order. Sec.7
of Rule 18 on pre-trial in civil actions is
explicit in allowing a modification of
the pre-trial Order “before” trial begins
to prevent manifest injustice.
35 Florencio sued Guillermo for partition of a property they NO, because the non-joinder of parties Civil Procedure Parties to civil Misjoinder and 2009
owned in common. Guillermo filed a motion to dismiss the is not a ground for dismissal of action actions non-joinder of
complaint because Florencio failed to implead Hernando (Rule 3, Sec. 11). The motion to dismiss parties
and Inocencio, the other co-owners of the property. As should be denied.
judge, will you grant the motion to dismiss? Explain. (3%)
5 Angela, a resident of Quezon City, sued Antonio, a resident No, the action will not prosper because Civil Procedure Venue Venue of real 2008
of Makati City before the RTC of Quezon City for the it was filed in the wrong venue. Since actions
reconveyance of two parcels of land situated in Tarlac and the action for reconveyance is a real
Nueva Ecija, respectively. action, it should have been filed
separately in Tarlac and Nueva Ecija,
May her action prosper? (3%) where the parcels of land are located
(Section 1, Rule 4; United Overseas
Bank of the Philippines vs. Rosemoore
Mining & Development Corp., et al.,
G.R. nos. 159669 & 163521, March 12,
2007). However, an improperly laid
venue may be waived, if not pleaded in
a timely motion to dismiss (Sec. 4, Rule
4). Without a motion to dismiss on the
ground of improperly laid venue, it
would be incorrect for the Court to
dismiss the action for improper venue.
6 Angela, a resident of Quezon City, sued Antonio, a resident The action must be filed in any Civil Procedure Venue Venue of real 2008
of Makati City before the RTC of Quezon City for the province where any of the lands actions
reconveyance of two parcels of land situated in Tarlac and involved lies – either in tarlac or in
Nueva Ecija, respectively. Nueva Ecija, because the action is a real
action (BPI vs. Green, 57 Phil. 712; Sec.
Assuming that the action was for foreclosure on the 1, Rule 4; Bank of America vs. American
mortgage of the same parcels of land, what is the proper Realty Corp., G.R. No. 133876, 29
venue for the action? (3%) December 1999). However, an
improperly laid venue may be waived if
not pleaded as a ground for dismissal
(Sec. 4, Rule 4).
17 Arturo lent P1M to his friend Robert on the condition that No, the complaint may not be Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment 2008
Rober execute a promissory note for the loan and a real amended under the circumstances. A
estate mortgage over his property located in Tagaytay City. complaint may be amended as of right
Rober complied. In his promissory note dated September before answer (Sec. 2, Rule 10; See Ong
20, 2006, Robert undertook to pay the loan within a year Peng vs. Custodio, G.R. No. 14911, 12
from its date at 12% per annum interest. In June 2007, March 1961; Toyota Motors [Phils} vs.
Arturo requested Robert to pay ahead of time but the latter C.A., G.R. No. 102881, 07 December
refused and insisted on the agreement. Arturo issued a 1992; RCPI vs. C.A., G.R. No. 121397, 17
demand letter and when Robert did not comply, Arturo April 1997, citing Prudence Realty &
filed an action to foreclose the mortgage. Robert moved to Dev‟t. Corp. vs. C.A., G.R. No. 110274,
dismiss the complatint for lack of cause of action as the 21 March 1994; Soledad vs.
debt was not yet due. The resolution of the motion to Mamangun, 8 SCRA 110), but the
dismiss was delayed because of the retirement of the amendment should refer to facts which
Judge. occurred prior to the filing of the
original complaint. It thus follows that a
On October 1, 2007, pending resolution of the motion to complaint whose cause of action has
dismiss, Arturo filed an amended complaint alleging not yet accrued cannot be cured or
Robert’s debt had in the meantime become due but that remedied by an amended or
Robert still refused to pay. Should the amended complaint supplemental pleading alleging the
be allowed considering that no answer has been filed? (3%) existence or accrual of a cause of action
while the case is pending (Swagman
Hotels & Travel, Inc. vs. C.A., G.R. No.
161135, 08 April 2005).
18 Arturo lent P1M to his friend Robert on the condition that A supplemental complaint may be filed Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment 2008
Rober execute a promissory note for the loan and a real with leave of court to allege an event
estate mortgage over his property located in Tagaytay City. that arose after the filing of the original
Rober complied. In his promissory note dated September complaint that should have already
20, 2006, Robert undertook to pay the loan within a year contained a cause of action (Sec. 6,
from its date at 12% per annum interest. In June 2007, Rule 10). However, if no cause of action
Arturo requested Robert to pay ahead of time but the latter is alleged in the original complaint, it
refused and insisted on the agreement. Arturo issued a cannot be cured by the filing of a
demand letter and when Robert did not comply, Arturo supplement or amendment to allege
filed an action to foreclose the mortgage. Robert moved to the subsequent acquisition of a cause
dismiss the complatint for lack of cause of action as the of action (Swagman Hotels & Travel,
debt was not yet due. The resolution of the motion to Inc. vs. C.A., G.R. No. 161135, 08 April
dismiss was delayed because of the retirement of the 2005).
Judge.

Would your answer be different had Arturo filed instead a


supplemental complaint stating that the debt became due
after the filing of the original complaint? (2%)
22 Half-brothers Roscoe and Salvio inherited from their father As a general rule, no stranger should be Civil Procedure Parties to civil Parties to civil 2008
a vast tract of unregistered land. Roscoe succeeded in bound to a judgment where he is not actions actions
gaining possession of the parcel of land in its entirety and included as a party. The rule on
transferring the tax declaration thereon in his name. transfer of interest pending litigation is
Roscoe sold the northern half to Bono, Salvio’s cousin. found in Sec. 19, Rule 3, 1997 Rules of
Upon learning of the sale, Salvio asked Roscoe to convey Civil Procedure. The action may
the southern half to him. Roscoe refused as he even sold continue unless the court, upon motion
one-third of the southern half along the West to Carlo. directs a person to be substituted in
Thereupon, Salvio filed an action for reconveyance of the the action or joined with the original
southern half against Roscoe only. Carlo was not party. Carlo is not bound by the
impleaded. After filing his answer, Roscoe sold the middle judgment. He became a co-owner
third of the southern half to Nina. Salvio did not amend the before the case was filed (Matuguina
complaint to implead Nina. After trial, the court rendered Integrated Wood Products, Inc. vs. C.A.,
judgment ordering Roscoe to reconvey the entire southern G.R. No. 98310, 24 October 1996;
half to Salvio. The judgment became final and executory. A Polaris vs. Plan, 69 SCRA 93; See also
writ of execution having been issued, the sheriff required Asset Privatization Trust vs. C.A., G.R.
Roscoe, Carlo and Nina to vacate the southern half and No. 121171, 29 December 1998).
yield possession thereof to Salvio as the prevailing party. However, Nina is a privy or a successor
Carlo and Nina refused, contending that they are not bound in interest and is bound by the
by the judgment as they are not parties to the case. Is the judgment even if she is not a party to
contention tenable? Explain fully. (4%) the case (Sec. 19, Rule 3, 1997 Rules of
Civil Procedure; Cabresos vs. Tiro, 166
SCRA 400 [1998]). A judgment is
conclusive between the parties and
their successors-in-interest by title
subsequent to the case (Sec. 47, Rule
39, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure).
7 True or False. If the answer is false, explain your answer True. A counterclaim is a pleading by Civil Procedure Pleadings Kinds of Pleadings 2007
briefly. which a defending party makes a claim
against an opposing party (Sec. 6, Rule
d. A counterclaim is pleading. (2%) 6, Rules of Court).True. A counterclaim
is a pleading by which a defending
party makes a claim against an
opposing party (Sec. 6, Rule 6, Rules of
Court).
15 B files a petition for cancellation of the birth certificate of R's petition for annulment of judgment Civil Procedure Parties to Civil Indispensable 2007
her daughter R on the ground of falsified material entries before the Court of Appeals should be Actions Parties
there in made by B's husband as the informant. The RTC granted. Although there was
sets the case for hearing and directs the publications of the publication of the court order acting
order once a week for three consecutive weeks in a the petition to cancel the birth
newspaper of general circulation. Summons was served on certificate, reasonable notice still has
the Civil Registrar but there was no appearance during the to be served on R as she has an interest
hearing. The RTC granted the petition. R filed a petition for affected by the cancellation. (Sec. 3 and
annulment of judgment before the Court of Appeals, saying 4, Rule 108, Rules of Court) She is an
that she was not notified of the petition and hence, the indispensable party (Republic v.
decision was issued in violation of due process. B opposed Benemerito, 425 SCRA 488 [2004]), and
saying that the publication of the court order was sufficient notice has to be served on her, not for
compliance with due process. Rule. (5%) the purpose of vesting the court with
jurisdiction, but to comply with the
requirements of fair play and due
process (Ceruila v. Delantar, 477 SCRA
134 [2005]).

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The petition for annulment of
judgment should not be granted. While
R is an indispensable party, it has been
held that the failure to service notice
on indispensable parties is cured by the
publication made because the action is
one in rem (Alba v. Court of Appeals,
465 SCRA 495 [2005]; Barco v. Court of
Appeals, 420 SCRA 39 [2005]).
20 RC filed a complaint for annulment of the foreclosure sale A certification against forum shopping Civil Procedure Pleadings Counterclaims 2007
against Bank V. in its answer, Bank V set up a counter claim is required only in initiatory pleadings.
for actual damages and litigation expenses. RC filed a In this case, the counterclaim pleaded
motion to dismiss the counterclaim on the ground the Bank in the defendant‟s Answer appears to
V's Answer with Counterclaim was not accompanied by a have arisen from the plaintiff‟s
certification against forum shopping. Rule. (5%) complaint or compulsory in nature and
thus, may not be regarded as an
initiatory pleading. The absence
thereof in the Bank‟s Answer is not a
fatal defect. Therefore, the motion to
dismiss on the ground raised lacks
merit and should be denied (UST v.
Suria, 294 SCRA 382 [1998]).

On the other hand, if the counterclaim


raised by the defendant Bank‟s Answer
was not predicated on the plaintiff‟s
claim or cause of action, it is
considered a permissive counterclaim.
In which case, tit would partake an
initiatory pleading which requires a
certification against forum shopping.

Correspondingly, the motion to dismiss


based on lack of the required
certificate against forum shopping
should be granted.
4 Distinguish jurisdiction from venue? (2%) Jurisdiction is the power of the Court to Civil Procedure Venue Venue vs 2006
decide a case on the merits, while Jurisdiction
venue refers to the place where the
suit may be filed. In criminal actions,
however, venue is jurisdictional.
Jurisdiction may not be conferred upon
a court by consent through waiver, but
venue may be waived except in
criminal cases.
5 What do you mean by (a) real actions; and (b) personal Real actions are actions affecting title Civil Procedure Actions Personal Actions 2006
actions? (2%) to or possession of real property or an and Real Actions
interest therein. All other actions are
personal actions (Sec. 1, Rule 4 of the
1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure).
7 What is forum shopping? (2.5%) Forum shopping is the act of filing Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2006
multiple suits involving the same Pleading
parties for the same cause of action,
either simultaneously or successively,
for the purpose of obtaining a
favorable judgment (Executive
Secretary v Gordon, 298 SCRA 735
[1998]).
8 Honey filed with the Regional Trial Court, Taal, Batangas a If I were the judge, I will deny the Civil Procedure Pleadings Parts of a 2006
complaint for specific performance against Bernie. For lack Motion for Reconsideration. The Pleading
of a certification against forum shopping, the judge requirement of filing a certificate of
dismissed the complaint. Honey's lawyer filed a motion for non-forum shopping is mandatory; it is
reconsideration, attaching thereto an amended complaint not curable by mere amendment of the
with the certification against forum shopping. If you were complaint but the dismissal of the case
the judge, how will you resolve the motion? (5%) shall be without prejudice. [Sec. 5, Rule
7 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil
Procedure]. However, the rule may be
liberally construed when there are
compelling reasons and a strict and
literal application of the rule on non-
forum shopping and verification will
result in a patent denial of substantial
justice (Valte v Court of Appeals, 433
SCRA 185 [2004]; Wack Wack Golf &
Country Club v NLRC, 456 SCRA 280
[2005]).
9 Jojie filed with the Regional Trial Court of Laguna a Under the present rule, there can be no Civil Procedure Pleadings Declaration of 2006
complaint for damages against Joe. During the pre-trial, judmgent by default by mere failure of Default
Jojie and her counsel failed to appear despite notice to the defendant to appear in the pre-
both of them. Upon oral motion of Jojie, Joe was declared trial. The only consequence of such
as in default and Jojie was allowed to present her evidence failure to appear is that the plaintiff can
ex palte. Thereafter, the court rendered its Decision in present his evidence ex parte and the
favor of Jojie. Joe hired Jose as his counsel. What are the court may render judgment on the
remedies available to him? Explain. (5%) basis thereof (Sec. 5, Rule 18 of the
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure).

The following are the remedies


available to Joe:
(a) motion for reconsideration;
(b) motion for new trial;
(c) appeal;
(d) petition for relief from a judgment
of default;
(e) annulment of judgment under Rule
47; and
(f) certiorari under Rule 65.
36 In 1996, Congress passed Republic Act No.8189, otherwise Yes, the Office of the Solicitor General Civil Procedure Parties to civil Real parties-in- 2006
known as the Voters' Registration Act of 1996, providing for can represent Chairman Go before the actions interest;
computerization of elections. Pursuant thereto, the Regional Trial Court. The OSG is an indispensable
COMELEC approved the Voters' Registration and independent office. Its hands are not parties;
Identification System (VRIS) Project. It issued invitations to shacked to the cause of its client representatives
pre-qualify and bid for the project. After the public bidding, agency. In the discharge of its task, the as parties;
Fotokina was declared the winning bidder with a bid of P6 primordial concern of the OSG is to see necessary parties;
Billion and was issued a Notice of Award. But COMELEC to it that the best interests of the indigent parties;
Chairman Gener Go objected to the award on the ground government is upheld (COMELEC v alternative
that under the Appropriations Act, the budget for the Quijano-Padilla, 389 SCRA 353 [2002]). defendants
COMELEC's modernization is only P1 Billion. He announced
to the public that the VRIS project has been set aside. Two
Commissioners sided with Chairman Go, but the majority
voted to uphold the contract. Meanwhile, Fotokina filed
with the RTC a petition for mandamus to compel the
COMELEC to implement the contract. The Office of the
Solicitor General (OSG), representing Chairman Go,
opposed the petition on the ground that mandamus does
not lie to enforce contractual obligations. During the
proceedings, the majority Commissioners filed a
manifestation that Chairman Go was not authorized by the
COMELEC En Banc to oppose the petition.

May the OSG represent Chairman Go before the RTC


notwithstanding that his position is contrary to that of the
majority? (5%.)
4 Distinguish a derivative suit from a class suit. A derivative suit is a suit in equity that Civil Procedure Parties to Civil Class Suit 2005
is filed by a minority shareholder in Actions
behalf of a coporation to redress
wrongs committed against it, for which
the directors refuse to sue, the real
party in interest being the corporation
itself (Lim v Lim-Yu, 352 SCRA 216
[2001]). A class suit is filed in behalf of
many persons so numerous that it is
impracticable to joint all as parties.
(Sec. 12, Rule 3, 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure).
9 Perry is a resident of Manila, while Ricky and Marvin are It was not proper for Ricky to join his Civil Procedure Cause of Action Joinder and 2005
residents of Batangas City. They are the co-owners of a causes of action against Perry in his misjoinder of
parcel of residential land located in Pasay City with an complaint for partition against Perry causes of action
assessed value of P100,000.00. Perry borrowed and Marvin. The causes of action may
P100,000.00 from Ricky which he promised to pay on or be between the same parties, Ricky and
before December 1, 2004. However, Perry failed to pay his Perry, with respect to the loan but not
loan. Perry also rejected Ricky and Marvin's proposal to with respect to the partition which
partition the property. includes Marvin. The joinder is
between a partition and a sum of
Ricky filed a complaint against Perry and Marvin in the money, but PARTITION is a special civil
Regional Trial Court of Pasay City for the partition of the action under Rule 69, which cannot be
property. He also incorporated in his complaint his action joined with other causes of action.
against Perry for the collection of the latter's P100,000.00 (See. 5[b], Rule 2,) Also, the causes of
loan, plus interests and attorney's fees. action pertain to different venues and
jurisdictions. The case for a sum of
State with reasons whether it was proper for Ricky to join money pertains to the municipal court
his causes of action in his complaint for partition against and cannot be filed in Pasay City
Perry and Marvin in the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City. because the plaintiff is from Manila
while Ricky and Marvin are from
Batangas City. (Sec. 5, Rule 2, 1997
Rules of Civil Procedure)
10 Raphael, a warehouseman, filed a complaint against V The motion to dismiss should be Civil Procedure Cause of Action Splitting a single 2005
Corporation, X Corporation and Y Corporation to compel granted. Raphael should have cause of action
them to interplead. He alleged therein that the three incorporated in his complaint for and its effects
corporations claimed title and right of possession over the interpleader his claim for storage fees
goods deposited in his warehouse and that he was and advances, the amounts of which
uncertain which of them was entitled to the goods. After were obviously determinable at the
due proceedings, judgment was rendered by the court time of the filing of the complaint. They
declaring that X Corporation was entitled to the goods. The are part of Raphael's cause of action
decision became final and executory. which he may not be split. Hence,
when the warehouseman asks the
Raphael filed a complaint against X Corporation for the court to ascertain who among the
payment of P100,000.00 for storage charges and other defendants are entitled to the goods,
advances for the goods. X Corporation filed a motion to he also has the right to ask who should
dismiss the complaint on the ground of res judicata. X pay for the storage fees and other
Corporation alleged that Raphael should have incorporated related expenses. The filing of the
in his complaint for interpleader his claim for storage fees interpleader is available as a ground for
and advances and that for his failure he was barred from dismissal of the second case. (Sec. 4,
interposing his claim. Raphael replied that he could not Rule 2,) It is akin to a compulsory
have claimed storage fees and other advances in his counterclaim which, if not set up, shall
complaint for interpleader because he was not yet certain be barred. (Sec. 2, Rule 9, ; Arreza v.
as to who was liable therefor. Diaz, G.R.

Resolve the motion with reasons.


16 In a complaint for recovery of real property, the plaintiff Defendant cannot deny the sale of the Civil Procedure Pleadings Allegations in a 2005
averred, among others, that he is the owner of the said property for lack of knowledge or pleading
property by virtue of a deed of sale executed by the information sufficient to form a belief
defendant in his favor. Copy of the deed of sale was as to the truth thereof. The answer
appended to the complaint as Annex "A" thereof. amounts to an admission. The
defendant must aver or state positively
In his unverified answer, the defendant denied the how it is that he is ignorant of the facts
allegation concerning the sale of the property in question, alleged. (Phil, Advertising Counselors,
as well as the appended deed of sale, for lack of knowledge Inc. v. Revilla, G.R. No. L-31869, August
or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 8, 1973; Sec. 10, Rule 8) Moreover, the
thereof. genuineness and due execution of the
deed of sale can only be denied by the
Is it proper for the court to render judgment without trial? defendant under oath and failure to do
Explain. so is also an admission of the deed.
(Sec. 8, Rule 8) Hence, a judgment on
the pleadings can be rendered by the
court without need of a trial.
17 On May 12, 2005, the plaintiff filed a complaint in the The motion to dismiss should be Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment or 2005
Regional Trial Court of Quezon City for the collection of denied. Basic is the rule that a motion substitution of
P250,000.00. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the to dismiss is not a responsive pleading. complaint or
complaint on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction Under the Rules, a pleader may amend information
over the action since the claimed amount of P250,000.00 is his pleading as a matter of right before
within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial the other party has served his
Court of Quezon City. responsive pleading. (Sec. 2, Rule 10,
Rules of Court) The court, in allowing
Before the court could resolve the motion, the plaintiff, the amendment, would not be acting
without leave of court, amended his complaint to allege a without jurisdiction because allowing
new cause of action consisting in the inclusion of an an amendment as a matter of right
additional amount of P200,000.00,thereby increasing his does not require the exercise of
total claim to P450,000.00. The plaintiff thereafter filed his discretion. The court therefore would
opposition to the motion to dismiss, claiming that the not be "acting" and thus, could not
Regional Trial Court had jurisdiction over his action. have acted without jurisdiction. It
would have been different had the
Rule on the motion of the defendant with reasons. amendments been made after a
responsive pleading had been served.
The court then would have been
exercising its discretion in allowing or
disallowing the amendment. It cannot
do so however, because it would be
then acting on an amendment of a
complaint over which it has no
jurisdiction. (Soledad v. Mamangun,
G.R. No. L-17983,
May 30, 1963; Gumabay v. Baralin, G.R.
No. L-30683, May 31, 1977; Prudence
Realty v. CA, G.R. No. 110274, March
21, 1994)
18 A obtained a money judgment against B. After the finality NO. C has not been properly impleaded Civil Procedure Pleadings Effect of failure to 2005
of the decision, the court issued a writ of execution for the as a party defendant. He cannot be plead
enforcement thereof. Conformably with the said writ, the held liable for the judgment against A
sheriff levied upon certain properties under B's name. C without a trial. In fact, since no bond
filed a third-party claim over said properties claiming that B was filed by B, the sheriff is liable to C
had already transferred the same to him. for damages. C can file a separate
action to enforce his third-party claim.
A moved to deny the third-party claim and to hold B and C It is in that suit that B can raise the
jointly and severally liable to him for the money judgment ground of fraud against C. However,
alleging that B had transferred said properties to C to the execution may proceed where
defraud him (A). there is a finding that the claim is
fraudulent. (Tanongan v. Samson, G.R.
After due hearing, the court denied the third-party claim No. 140889, May 9, 2002)
and rendered an amended decision declaring B and C
jointly and severally liable to A for the money judgment.

Is the ruling of the court correct? Explain.