Defendant prop was attached by Sheriff moved discharge writ of attachment on the ground same was

improperly issued:

Forlack of service of summons

Notice to him regarding plaintiffs

> the trial court has not acquired jurisdiction over the persons of the respondent since no summons was
yet served upon them. The proper officer should have previously or simultaneously with the
implementation of the writ of attachment, served a copy of the summons upon the respondents in
order for the trial court to have acquired jurisdiction upon them and for the writ to have binding effect.
Consequently, even if the writ of attachment was validly issued, it was improperly or irregularly
enforced and, therefore, cannot bind and affect the respondents.

Writ of Replevin seizure of factory machines meet the needs. Writ of replevin proper?

>Rule 60 of the Rules of Court provides that writs of replevin are issued for the recovery of personal
property only.15 Section 3 thereof reads:

Rule 65 correct remedy question executive orders?

>No. Since the issuance of an EO is not judicial, quasi-judicial or a mandatory act, a petition for certiorari
and prohibition is an incorrect remedy; instead a petition for declaratory relief under Rule 63 of the
Rules of Court, filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), is the proper recourse to assail the validity of EO

Rule 45 v Rule 65 distinguish

{FIRMS HEAP-J}

What is the proper remedy to question the order of the RTC quashing the Search Warrant

a) Issued as an incident in a pending criminal case and why?

Where the search warrant is issued as an incident in a pending criminal case, as it was in Marcelo, the
quashal of a search warrant is merely interlocutory. There is still "something more to be done in the said
criminal case, i.e., the determination of the guilt of the accused therein. Thus, the quashal of the search
warrants were final orders, not interlocutory, and an appeal may be properly taken therefrom. Rule 45

b) Issued prior to filing of a criminal case and why?

where a search warrant is applied for and issued in anticipation of a criminal case yet to be filed, the
order quashing the warrant (and denial of a motion for reconsideration of the grant) ends the judicial
process. There is nothing more to be done thereafter.

CPM

Equity of redemption v right of redemption

>In relation to mortgage, the right of redemption exists in extra-judicial foreclosure; while equity of
redemption exists only in judicial foreclosure. In extrajudicial foreclosure, the mortgagor may exercise
his right of redemption within 1 year from the registration of the sale in the Office of the Registry of
Deeds; while in judicial foreclosure, the mortgagor may exercise his equity of redemption during the
period of not less than 90 days nor more than 120 days from entry of judgment of foreclosure or even
after the foreclosure sale but before the judicial confirmation of the sale. There is no right of
redemption in judicial foreclosure of mortgage, except only if the mortgagee is the Philippine National
Bank or any banking institution. Thus, in judicial foreclosure of mortgage where the mortgagee is the
Philippine National Bank or any banking institution, there exist both equity of redemption and right of
redemption.

METC judgment unlawful detainer, legally stay or suspend the immediate execution of the METC
judgment

>It can be stayed by the defendant only by perfecting an appeal, filing a supersedeas bond, and making
a periodic deposit of the rental or the reasonable compensation for the use and occupancy of the
property during the pendency of the appeal. These requisites are mandatory and concurrent.[19] Thus,
if not complied with, execution will issue as a matter of right.

Unlawful detainer structure built by the lessee land of the lessor

>Section 10 (d), Rule 39 provides "When the property subject of the execution contains improvements
constructed or planted by the judgment obligor or his agent, the officer shall not destroy, demolish or
remove said improvements except upon special order of the court, issued upon motion of the judgment
obligee after due hearing and after the former has failed to remove the same within a reasonable time
fixed by the court."

Remedies

Direct contempt- A person may be adjudged in direct contempt of court pursuant to Section 1, Rule 71
of the Rules of Court[34] without need of a hearing but may thereafter avail of the remedies of certiorari
or prohibition

Indirect contempt- ndirect contempt may be appealed to the proper court as in criminal cases.

Last demand AV 40,00, if today you are engaged as counsel of plaintiff, court jurisdiction?

> MTC because it is accion publiciana recovery of the real right of possession when dispossession lasted
for more than 1 year

Driver lawyer hearing unknown reserved rtc judge cited contempt jailed for 3 days

> The phrase improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the
administration of justice is so broad and general that it encompasses wide spectrum of acts that could
constitute indirect contempt. However, the act of complainant in parking his car in a slot allegedly
reserved for respondent judge does not fall under this category. There was no showing that he acted
with malice and/or bad faith or that he was improperly motivated to delay the proceedings of the court
by making use of the parking slot supposedly reserved for respondent judge. We cannot also say that
the said act of complainant constitutes disrespect to the dignity of the court. In sum, the incident is too
flimsy and inconsequential to be the basis of an indirect contempt proceeding.

Failed to give support to petitioner

a)resolve the appea

>interlocutory order-an exeception the genereal rule na dapat subject to the execution

b) failed to comply with the order:

>enforcement order:issuance by the court->motu proprio or

Upon motion, of an order of execution against the adverse party

c) failed to comply despite receipt writ of execution-indirect contempt

y?disobedience or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order or judgment

bank check 350,000 x and y

> nterpleader is a proper remedy where a bank which had issued a manager's check is subjected to
opposing claims by persons who respectively claim a right to the funds covered by the manager's check.
2 The Bank is entitled to take necessary precautions so that, as far possible, it does not make a mistake
as to who is entitled to payment; the necessary precautions include, precisely, recourse to an
interpleader suit.

>jurisdiction: 350,000 personal property RTC

Expropriation 20 families fishermen. Does not justify taking?

>Yes. Public use meanse public usefulness or productive of the general benefit, general welfare

Unlawful detainer moral, temperate and exemplary damages

> no basis for the MTC to award actual, moral and exemplary damages in view of the settled rule that in
ejectment cases, the only damage that can be recovered is the fair rental value or the reasonable
compensation for the use and occupation of the property.[32] Considering that the only issue raised in
ejectment is that of rightful possession, damages which could be recovered are those which the plaintiff
could have sustained as a mere possessor, or those caused by the loss of the use and occupation of the
property, and not the damages which he may have suffered but which have no direct relation to his loss
of material possession

Pleading or motion containing derogatory, offensive and malicious statements

>direct contempt

-submitted to the court or judge

In which the proceedings are pending and has ruled to be

-equivalent to misbehavior committed in the presence or so near a court or judge as to interrupt the
proceedings before the same and therefore constitutes direct contempt

>indirect contempt

-use of disrespectful or contemptuous language against a particular judge in pleadings presented in

another court or proceeding

-tantamount to a misbehavior in the presence of or son near a court or judge as to interrupt

administration of justice

Stages of main issues

>expropriation

-1)Determination authority of the plaintiff to exercise the power of eminent domain

2)determination by the court of just compensation for the property sought to be taken

>partition

-1)determination WON a co-ownership exists and if partition is proper

2)accounting and actual partition of the property

Difference Rule 64 v Rule 65

>le 64, however, cannot simply be equated to Rule 65 even if it expressly refers to the latter rule. They
exist as separate rules for substantive reasons as discussed below. Procedurally, the most patent
difference between the two i.e., the exception that Section 2, Rule 64 refers to is Section 3 which
provides for a special period for the filing of petitions for certiorari from decisions or rulings of the
COMELEC en banc. The period is 30 days from notice of the decision or ruling (instead of the 60 days
that Rule 65 provides), with the intervening period used for the filing of any motion for reconsideration
deductible from the originally-granted 30 days (instead of the fresh period of 60 days that Rule 65
provides).

as Rule 64, not Rule 65, is the vehicle for review of judgments and final orders or resolutions of the
COMELEC. Respondent Almirante points out that Rule 64 and Rule 65 are different; Rule 65 provides for
a 60-day period for filing petitions for certiorari, while Rule 64 provides for 30 days.

Trial judge jurisdiction not pointed out by law or ordinary or regular procedures

> Means to carry jurisdiction into effect. — When by law jurisdiction is conferred on a court or judicial
officer, all auxiliary writs, processes and other means necessary to carry it into effect may be employed
by such court or officer; and if the procedure to be followed in the exercise of such jurisdiction is not
specifically pointed out by law or by these rules, any suitable process or mode of proceeding may be
adopted which appears comfortable to the spirit of the said law or rules.
SAMPLEX 2

1. Quieting TITLE 40,000. Rtc dismissed lack of jurisdiction

Yes, the RTC is correct.

In a number of cases, it was held that actions to quiet title over real property are real actions or actions
that fall under the classification of cases that involve "title to, or possession of, real property, or any
interest therein." (Heirs of Concha vs Sps. Lumocso)

Under the B.P 129, Sec. 19 (2), RTC shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions which
involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed value of
the property involved exceeds P20,000.00 or for civil actions in Metro Manila, where such the value
exceeds 50,000.00.

In the given case, the real property is situated in Tondo, Manila and with an assessed value of P 40, 000,
thus, the RTC has no jurisdiction over the action to quiet the title of said property.

2. City ordinance certiorari and prohibition playing karaoke

No, the foregoing petition for Certiorari and Prohibition is not correct.

Under the Rules of Court, petitions for Certiorari and Prohibition are availed of to question judicial,
quasi-judicial and mandatory acts. Since the issuance of an ordinance is not judicial, quasi-judicial or a
mandatory act, a petition for certiorari and prohibition is an incorrect remedy. Instead a petition for
declaratory relief under Rule 63 of the Rules of Court, filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), is the
proper recourse to assail the validity of the assailed city ordinance. (Galicto vs Aquino, G.R. No. 193978)

Rule 63, Section 1. Any person whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or regulation,
ordinance, or any other governmental regulation may, before breach or violation thereof, bring an
action in the appropriate Regional Trial Court to determine any question of construction or validity
arising, and for a declaration of his rights or duties, thereunder.

3. No, the action may not prosper.

Under Section 1, Rule 64 of the New Rules of Court, an action for the reformation of an instrument is
instituted as a special civil action for declaratory relief. Since the purpose of an action for declaratory
relief is to secure an authoritative statement of the rights and obligations of the parties for their
guidance in the enforcement thereof, or compliance therewith, and not to settle issues arising from an
alleged breach thereof, it may be entertained only before the breach or violation of the law or contract
to which it refers. (G.R. No. 128991)
In the given case, Arturo filed action for reformation of the lease contract after Berto’s breach or
violation of its terms. Consequently, the remedy of reformation no longer lies.

4.ground prescription of estafa, rtc dismissed it. Private prosecutor file certiorari rule 65

No, the private prosecutor may not.

Jurisprudence has been consistent on this point. In criminal proceedings on appeal in the Court of
Appeals or in the Supreme Court, the authority to represent the People of the Philippines is vested
SOLELY in the Solicitor General. Under Presidential Decree No. 478, among the specific powers and
functions of the OSG was to represent the government in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals
in all criminal proceedings. This provision has been carried over to the Revised Administrative Code
Without doubt, the OSG is the appellate counsel of the People of the Philippines in all criminal cases.
(Cario v. De Castro)

Under Section 5, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court all criminal actions commenced by complaint or
information shall be prosecuted under the direction and control of the fiscal. The fiscal represents the
People of the Philippines in the prosecution of offenses before the trial courts at the metropolitan trial
courts, municipal trial courts, municipal circuit trial courts and the regional trial courts. However, when
such criminal actions are brought to the Court of Appeals or this Court, it is the Solicitor General who
must represent the People of the Philippines not the fiscal. (City Fiscal of Tacloban v. Espina)

5. zald filed joint petition for review on certiorari and petition for certiorari

No, the procedure taken by Zaid is not proper. Filing a joint Petition for Review on Certiorari and Petition
for Certiorari in one consolidated petition is not a proper remedy.

Where appeal is available to the aggrieved party, the action for certiorari will not be entertained.
Remedies of appeal, including petitions for review, and certiorari are mutually exclusive, not alternative
or successive. One of the requisites of certiorari is that there be no available appeal or any plain, speedy
and adequate remedy. Where an appeal is available, certiorari will not prosper, even if the ground
therefor is grave abuse of discretion. (MADRIGAL TRANSPORT, INC. vs. LAPANDAY HOLDINGS
CORPORATION, G.R. No. 156067)

6. interlocutory order issued by rtc questioned by xavier

No, It is not an automatic legal remedy. In J.L. Bernardo Construction v. Court of Appeals, we stated that
a petition for certiorari is an appropriate remedy to assail an interlocutory order: (1) when the tribunal
issued such order without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion and (2) when the
assailed interlocutory order is patently erroneous and the remedy of appeal would not afford adequate
and expeditious relief. (G.R. No. 190253)

7. RTC baguio. Subsequently squashed the search warrant

Whether the criminal case (of which the search warrant is an incident) has already been filed before the
trial court is significant for the purpose of determining the proper remedy from a grant or denial of a
motion to quash a search warrant.

Where the search warrant is issued as an incident in a pending criminal case, as it was in Marcelo, the
quashal of a search warrant is merely interlocutory. There is still "something more to be done in the said
criminal case, i.e., the determination of the guilt of the accused therein." (Rule 65)

In contrast, where a search warrant is applied for and issued in anticipation of a criminal case yet to be
filed, the order quashing the warrant (and denial of a motion for reconsideration of the grant) ends the
judicial process. There is nothing more to be done thereafter. (RULE 41)

Thus, the CA correctly ruled that Marcelo does not apply to this case. Here, the applications for search
warrants were instituted as principal proceedings and not as incidents to pending criminal actions.
When the search warrants issued were subsequently quashed by the RTC, there was nothing left to be
done by the trial court. Thus, the quashal of the search warrants were final orders, not interlocutory,
and an appeal may be properly taken therefrom. (G.R. No. 161106 )

8. Defendant appealed from the order of exprop issued by RTC. May it still appoint 3 commissioners to
determine the JC despite the appeal

A. The procedure for determining just compensation is set forth in Rule 67 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure. Section 5 of Rule 67 states that [u]pon the rendition of the order of expropriation, the court
shall appoint not more than three (3) competent and disinterested persons as commissioners to
ascertain and report to the court the just compensation for the property sought to be taken. If read in
relation with sec 4 of rule 67 it states that, the appeal shal not prevent the court from determining the
just compensation to be paid.

May the plaintiff enter real prop subject of expropriation and appropriate the same for public use
despite an appeal from the judgment of expropriation

B sec 11 rule 67 states that The right of the plaintiff to enter upon the property of the defendant and
appropriate the same for public use or purpose shall not be delayed by an appeal from the judgment.

9.

Suppose the proceeds of sale are not enough to pay the judgment debt due correct remedy of plaintiff

A. he may execute a motion for deficiency of judgment based on sec 6 rule 68 If upon the sale of any
real property there be a balance due to the plaintiff after applying the proceeds of the sale, the court,
upon motion, shall render judgment against the defendant for any such balance for which, he may be
personally liable to the plaintiff, upon which execution may issue immediately if the balance is all due at
the time of the rendition of the judgment; otherwise, the plaintiff shall be entitled to execution at such
time as the balance remaining becomes due under the terms of the original contract, which time shall
be stated in the judgment..

Defendant does not reside and not found phil, may court render proper judgment against him

B. Yes, the court can render proper judgment against him. Since, what is involved in this case is a real
action. Hence, the necessity of jurisdiction shall only be required on the property and not on the
defendant, since, a real action involves an in rem proceeding that binds the whole world.

Action for judicial partition planted fruit bearing trees. After trial, rtc of laguna issued an order of
partition and accounting

Aggrieved may appeal sa CA?

10 A. Yes, under sec 2 rule 69 last par A final order decreeing partition and accounting may be appealed
by any party aggrieved thereby. This pertains to ordinary appeal Rule 41, since, the order of partition is
final and appealable.

BASIS (De Mesa v. Court of Appeals)

The first stage of an action for judicial partition and/or accounting is concerned with the determination
of whether or not a co-ownership in fact exists and a partition is proper, that is, it is not otherwise
legally proscribed and may be made by voluntary agreement of all the parties interested in the property.
This phase may end in a declaration that plaintiff is not entitled to the desired partition either because a
co-ownership does not exist or a partition is legally prohibited. It may also end, on the other hand, with
an adjudgment that a co-ownership does in truth exist, that partition is proper in the premises, and that
an accounting of rents and profits received by the defendant from the real estate in question is in order.
In the latter case, "the parties may, if they are able to agree, make partition among themselves by
proper instruments of conveyance, and the court shall confirm the partition so agreed upon by all the
parties." In either case, whether the action is dismissed or partition and/or accounting is decreed, the
order is a final one and may be appealed by any party aggrieved thereby.

The second stage commences when the parties are unable to agree upon the partition ordered by the
court. In that event, partition shall be effected for the parties by the court with the assistance of not
more than three (3) commissioners. This second phase may also deal with the rendition of the
accounting itself and its approval by the Court after the parties have been accorded the opportunity to
be heard thereon, and an award for the recovery by the party or parties thereto entitled of their just
shares in the rents and profits of the real estate in question. Such an order is, to be sure, also final and
appealable.

Despite order of partition the parties are unable to agree upon the partion may RTC render judgment of
partition and how?

B. If the parties are unable to agree, sec 3 rule 69 shall apply, the court shall appoint not more than
three (3) competent and disinterested persons as commissioners to make the partition, commanding
them to set off to the plaintiff and to each party in interest such part and proportion of the property as
the court shall direct. The court at the same time cannot render judgment of partition, since, sec 6 of
rule 69 states that, No proceeding had before or conducted by the commissioners shall pass the title to
the property or bind the parties until the court shall have accepted the report of the commissioners and
rendered judgment thereon.

Notwithstanding the Notice of Preliminary Conference in an Unlawful Detainer case received by plaintiff,
she failed to appear at the preliminary conference, defendant moved that the complaint be dismissed
for failure of plaintiff to appear despite due notice whereupon the MTC of Asenso dismissed the
complaint without prejudice plaintiff filed motion for reconsideration of the subject order, defendant
opposed prohibited motion

A) who bet. Plaintiff and defendant is correct. DEFENDANT

The failure of the plaintiff to appear in the preliminary conference shall be cause for the dismissal of his
complaint. The defendant who appears in the absence of the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment on
his counterclaim in accordance with the next preceding section. All cross-claims shall be dismissed

rohibited pleadings and motions.-The following petitions, motions, or pleadings shall not be allowed-
Motion for reconsideration

B) suppose no MR is filed by plaintiff what is the proper remedy of plaintiff as far as the order of
dismissal without prejudice is concerned

Section 1, Rule 41 of the Rules of Court provides that the remedy of appeal is not available from an
order dismissing an action without prejudice.[8]

Sec. 1. Subject of appeal. An appeal may be taken from a judgment or final order that completely
disposes of the case, or of a particular matter therein when declared by these Rules to be appealable.

No appeal may be taken from: x x x

(h) An order dismissing an action without prejudice.

In all the above instances where the judgment or final order is not appealable, the aggrieved party may
file an appropriate special civil action under Rule 65.
Defendant occupied tolerance. After fiver years plaintiff wants defendant to vacate

Counsel for plaintiff what would you advise him to do before filing the proper complaint

>Unlawful detainer shall be commenced only after the demand and the lessee fails to comply.

Two fold demand

To pay and vacate OR

To comply with the conditions of the and vacate

a)when may indirect contempt be initiated by the court

. Motu proprio. - Proceedings for indirect contempt may be initiated motu propio by the court against
which the contempt was committed by an order or any other formal charge requiring the respondent to
show cause why he should not be punished for contempt.

2. Verified petition. - In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt shall be commenced by a verified
petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers involved therein,
and upon full compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory pleadings for civil actions in the court
concerned.

Being friends, deed REM was not registered with registry of deeds

16. YES. An unregistered real estate mortgage may be foreclosed(Mobil-Oil Phil v. Diocares)

17. Unlawful detainer moral, temperate, exemplary

NO. The court can only award damages in ejectment cases refer only to:

1. fair and reasonable value of the use and enjoyment of the prop or the rent arising from possession

2.liquidation damages when they form part of the contract

18. a) stay execution MTC decision on ejectment

1)defendant perfects his appeal

2)file sufficient supersedeas bond to pay the rents, damages and cost accruing down

3)makes periodical deposits with RTC during pendency of the appeal the amount of rent due
time to time under the contract or in the absence of a contract the reasonable value of the use and
occupation of the premises

In case appealed mtc decision is affirmed on appeal by rtc against, defendant what is the next proper
legal remedy of defendant?
 b)File petition for review under Rule 42

The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review in accordance with Rule 42

19.

How suspend the execute of judgment of contempt

a)Petition for certiorari or prohibition. Pending the resolution the execution of the judgment for
direct contempt shall be suspended. The suspension, however, shall take place only if the person
adjuged in contempt files a bond fixed by the court which rendered the judgment

b)Appeal such judgment or final order to the proper court as in criminal cases(by notice of
appeal). Judgment against a person adjudged to be in contempt is immediately executory and can be
stopped only by filing a bond

20. contempt filed before DARAB

Procedure complainant correct?

a) No. Hence, the contempt proceedings initiated through an unverified Motion for Contempt
filed by the respondent with the PARAD were invalid for the following reasons:[24] First, the
Rules of Court clearly require the filing of a verified petition with the Regional Trial Court,
which was not complied with in this case. The charge was not initiated by the PARAD motu
proprio; rather, it was by a motion filed by respondent. Second, neither the PARAD nor the
DARAB have jurisdiction to decide the contempt charge filed by the respondent. The
issuance of a warrant of arrest was beyond the power of the PARAD and the DARAB.
Consequently, all the proceedings that stemmed from respondents Motion for Contempt,
specifically the Orders of the PARAD

Proper forum jurisdiction?

b) Evidently, quasi-judicial agencies that have the power to cite persons for indirect contempt
pursuant to Rule 71 of the Rules of Court can only do so by initiating them in the proper Regional Trial
Court. It is not within their jurisdiction and competence to decide the indirect contempt cases. These
matters are still within the province of the Regional Trial Courts. In the present case, the indirect
contempt charge was filed, not with the Regional Trial Court, but with the PARAD, and it was the PARAD
that cited Mr. Lorayes with indirect contempt. (LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs.
SEVERINO LISTANA)

21. Taylor filed Ejectment case against Adele before the MeTC in Makati City over a commercial lot and
building. On the other hand, Adele filed complaint for Damages for P450,000.00 against Taylor before
RTC of Pasay City

Before RTC of Pasay City, Adele submitted therein a motion containing offensive and malicious
statements against the MeTC of Makati City handling the Ejectment case.
a. Such submission of motion containing offensive and malicious statements constitutes what
contempt charge-direct or indirect contempt? Explain. (2%)

b. In case a contempt charge is to be filed by Taylor against Adele in Makati City, in which court
should it be filed-MeTC or RTC of Makati City? Explain. (2%)

Answer:

a. Indirect contempt under Sec. 3(d) as any improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to
impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice. Indirect contempt is one not committed in
the presence of a court. It is an act done at a distance which tends to belittle, degrade, obstruct or
embarrass the court and justice (Siy vs. NLRC, 2005). It is not direct contempt, as the submission of the
motion containing offensive and malicious statements was not done in the presence of, or so near the
same court to which such statements were directed to.

b. It should be filed either in Makati City, in the RTC of the place where the lower court is sitting, or
MeTC Makati City, subject to appeal to the RTC of Makati City (Sec. 5, Rule 71).

22. Nognog, the accused in Qualified Theft of money wherein civil action is deemed jointly instituted,
was acquitted by RTC of Makati City on the ground that the Prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond
reasonable doubt.

The judgment of acquittal, however, failed to make express pronouncement as to whether or not said
accused is civilly liable to the offended party.

What proper petition should you file before the higher court to remedy the foregoing situation? Explain
well. (4%)

Answer: I will file an appeal to the CA, either via Rule 41 or Rule 42, depending on the court of origin.
Deemed instituted in every criminal prosecution is the civil liability arising from the crime or delict per se
(civil liability ex delicto), but not those liabilities from quasi-delicts, contracts or quasi-contracts. The
offended party may appeal a judgment in a criminal case acquitting the accused on reasonable doubt,
but only in regard to the civil liability ex delicto (Neplum Inc. vs Orbeso, 2002)

23. Plaintiff moved for Execution of MeTC Judgment on Ejectment pending appeal interposed by
Defendant. Plaintiff’s motion, however, does not contain “good reasons” for issuance of Writ of
Execution Pending Appeal nor the MeTC order contains the “good reasons” therefor.
Are Plaintiff and the MeTC correct in this instance? Why? (4%)

Answer: Yes. Sec. 19, Rule 70 provides that execution shall issue immediately upon motion, unless an
appeal has been perfected and the defendant files a supersedeas bond for accrued rentals to the MTC,
and periodically deposit accruing rentals to the RTC. The objective of the Revised Rules on Summary
Procedure is to achieve an expeditious and inexpensive determination of cases governed by it. This
objective provides the good reason that justifies immediate execution of the decision, if the standards of
Sec. 2, Rule 39 of the ROC on execution pending appeal are considered

24. For Failure to obey subpoena ad testificandum duly served upon witness Alberto and without
justifiable reason for failure to do so, the MTC judge summarily adjudged him for Direct Contempt and
fined him for P1,000.00

Is the MTC Judge correct? Give reasons. (4%)

Answer: No, the MTC judge is incorrect. Sec. 1, Rule 71 states that direct contempt is misbehavior in the
presence of or so near a court as to obstruct or interrupt the proceedings. Failure to obey a subpoena is
a ground for charging a person of indirect contempt under Sec. 3(f). The judge cannot summarily judge
Alberto and punish him right there and then, as a case of indirect contempt must be initiated by an
order of the court or any other formal charge requiring the respondent to show cause why he should
not be punished for contempt, giving the person charged an opportunity to comment thereon within
such period as may be fixed by the court, and to be heard by himself or counsel.