Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

12th Judicial Region
Branch 20 Tacurong City

SPOUSES RUTILLO PASOK Civil Case No. 765

& ESTELITA PASOK
Plaintiffs - for -

- versus – TORTS & DAMAGES

TACURONG GAY COMMERCIAL

INC., REP. BY: R OLANDO T. DINO
AS MANAGER & ROMUALDA DINO;
DINO, ROGER DINO, JIMMY LIU &
EMILY LIU
Defendants.
x-------------------------------------------------x

PETITION TO ADMIT M.R. AGAINST THE

MARCH 18, 2019 ORDER, MEMORANDUM
AND SUPPLEMENTAL MEMO, ETC

1. Atty. Pasok vehemently opposed Jimmy’s “………….

…………….. Improper Urgent Motion for Reconsideration dated 26
February………..? (no year) which was sustained by the Honorable Court
on March 18, 2019 but received by us April 5, 2019. In this pleading we will
supplement our earlier “Re-entry of Appearance …..………….. cum
memorandum” which was not denied and explain why we failed to attend
trial last June 29, 2018. We will further expound on the propriety of
dismissing this torts & damages case.

2. The Dino brothers were the first to present evidence for the
defense. In open court this counsel adopted in toto the defenses of the Dino
brothers and Gay Commercial Inc. thus the defenses of the Dinos and the
Gay Commercial Inc. are likewise the defenses of Jimmy. The Dino brothers
and Gay Commercial have already rested their case and all that has to be
done is to hear the defenses of Jimmy but he failed to attend the June 29,
2018 hearing.

2.1 I recall that before Jimmy would be heard last June 29, 2018, this
counsel had already withdrawn. At about that time I had also withdrawn
from his cases in the City Court of Davao City, one in RTC 17 of Davao City
and more estafa cases filed with the City fiscal of Davao. This counsel had
also withdrawn in his criminal case for falsification of public documents in
Br. 3, City Court of General Santos against his uncle.

1
This counsel had withdrawn also from all his cases out of town except
Polomolok, Alabel. After counsel’s rehabilitation of his failing health and
treatment of his eye and hearing problem, etc., at the Asian Eye Center in
Taguig City, in Quezon City, Metro Manila, we resumed practice of light
cases. I forgot all about that June 29, 2018 hearing but I am sure I told
Jimmy and I goaded him to see Atty. German Operiano who was holding
Pasok’s case against the Dinos, Jimmy’s co-defendants. I had occasions to
talk with Atty. Operiano that Jimmy will see him for retention as counsel
because I would be going to Manila for medical, eye treatment and health
rehabilitation. I had assumed that Jimmy will not forget about that 2018 trial
because I gave him the whole records.

2.2 But even in the adverse of Jimmy’s testimony on the stand, Jimmy
has formidably defenses Pasok has no cause of action because Jimmy did his
civic duty as a “good citizen” to bear witness in any unusual incident that
disturbs peace and tranquility of civil society. Jimmy was a witness to the
destruction of a building upon Pasok’s order. Pasok showed up in the
demolition. He castigated the sheriff, the PNP publicly and shamelessly
engaged the Dino brothers to a duel of scandalous and slanderous public
utterances, thereby putting lawyers in bad light. This public shoutings of
epithets and scandalous accusations were done in full public view. So when
Jimmy signed EXHIBIT “D” he simply did his duty. Jimmy exercised his
right to be a witness who cared to police the conduct of lawyers. The
defenses of the Dinos is along that same theory so Jimmy adopted them in
open court. These defenses is stark and clear in the records of the case even
if Jimmy failed to testify.

2.3 So even if Jimmy was not able to give his testimony to identify
EXHIBIT “D”, it is evident, palpable and clear in the record that Pasok has
no cause of action and if he got hurt, his hurt was damnum absque injuria,
damage without injury. It is also clear that Jimmy gave witness to the truth
which is a duty to do. It is also Jimmy’s right to bear witness to any event of
interest.

2.4 Jimmy claims that Pasok has no valid cause of action because
EXHIBIT “D”, is truthful narration of what transpired on December 11,
2014; that Pasok ordered his 7 carpenters to dismantle the building disputed
between Dr. Kaling Yu, the client of Pasok, and the Dino brothers, handled
by Atty. German Operiano. Jimmy was a mere witness a “good citizen”
whose duty was to bear witness to crime or any disturbance to civil society.
The injury Jimmy will do because of his truthful narration of facts is damage
without injury or Damnum Absque Injuria—damage without injury. Giving
truthful testimony amounts to a right to bear witness to truth. The principle
that anyone who causes injury because he exercised his right is not
actionable for torts or damages.

2
 2.5 Jimmy boldly asserts that Pasok has not suffered torment and
injuries, that are actionable. His damage is without redress for which the law
gives no remedy. These declarations reinforces the Latin Maxim Que Jure
Suo Utitus Nullum Damnum Facit – one who exercises a right does no
injury to no one. It is our contention that witness Jimmy committed no
wrong when he signed EXHIBIT “D” because it is a truthful narration of
facts he saw, perceived and made known to the world that on December 1,
2004 at 8:45 A.M., 7 persons on board a Mitsubishi Strada vehicle parked
adjacent his hardware store. Jimmy detailed that all the passengers were
carrying carpentry tools; they alighted together with Atty. Rutillo Pasok,
Jimmy saw and heard Atty. Pasok, gave verbal instructions while pointing
with his fingers the building standing on a lot, contested by Kaling Yu,
Pasok’s client, and the Dinos, who are neighbors of Jimmy. Jimmy saw that
Pasok instructed the 7 workers to demolish the building used by Kaling Yu
as a bodega. Jimmy further saw that the demolition was promptly complied
with which was witnessed also by passersby. At about 9:05 A.M. Jimmy
informed Rolando Dino thru cellular phone that Pasok and his men were
destroying the contested property and Dino said the property was already
awarded in favor of Tacurong Gay Commercial.

2.6 Moments later PNP and ex-RTC Sheriff Carlos Dias arrived.
Pasok & Sheriff Diaz “exchanged verbal arguments” in public view whereby
Atty. Pasok in a spate of anger asked the City PNP not to interfere and
prevented Mr. Roger Dino (brother of Rolando Dino) from resisting the
dismantling. Jimmy furthered that Pasok “fuming mad, cursed Diaz and
succeeded in destroying the building”; and at about 10:00 A.M. Rolando and
Robert arrived and got engaged in a heated discussion with Pasok. Pasok
later back out and off but was heard asking PNP that he will transport the
salvage materials to his client Dr. Kaling Yu.

3. It is the prime duty of citizenship to bear witness to anything that

disturbs society. Complaints against erring lawyers is a civic duty to do
hence are not actionable, unless it is utterly false and perjured but Pasok has
not shown with any affirmative evidence that Jimmy lied. The
administrative case where Jimmy was a witness was given cognizance by the
commission in Bar Discipline though dismissed by the S.C. but Jimmy
asserts that Adm. Case 7377 did not put Pasok in bad light.

3—1. Jimmy asserts that his sworn affidavit EXHIBIT “D” must be
met by Pasok with affirmative evidence sufficient to show non-culpability
because the S.C. says in Rayos Omboc vs, Rayos 285 SCRA-93:

“A proceeding for suspension or disbarment is not in any

sense a civil action where the complainant is a plaintiff and
the respondent lawyer is defendant. Disciplinary
proceedings involve no private interest and afford no

3
 redress for private grievance. They are undertaken and
prosecuted solely for the public welfare. The complainant
or the person who called the attention of the Court is in no
sense a party and has generally no interest in the outcome
except as all good citizens may have in the proper
administration of justice.”

3—2. So as plainly worded by the S.C., Pasok has no redress for the
truthful statements of facts because disbarment is prosecuted under the
general welfare clause and the complainants and witness Jimmy are referred
to as GOOD CITIZENS whose only desire is that only members of Bar in
good standing should take part in the administration of justice and that
members of the legal fraternity must never frustrate this end.

3—3. Jimmy countered that after filling by the Dinos of the

disbarment case, Pasok filed groundless suits and actions at different forums
against the Dinos and witness Jimmy to harass and browbeat them,
evidenced by the perjury case Pasok filed with the City Prosecution Office
of Koronadal City. This was dismissed already, attach with Jimmy’s answer
was marked EXHIBIT “1”, and made an integral part of his answer with
compulsory counterclaim.

3—4. Atty. Pasok lamented that Rolando and Roger, joined by witness
Jimmy plotted sinister schemes to put Pasok in bad light to cause him
damages but Pasok failed to show they were lies. Pasok simply alleged
negative denials, as a matter of fact we can synthesize from all pleadings, his
testimonies, exhibits and admissions that the building was destroyed upon
his instruction and direct order.

3—5. The complaint for disbarment together with Jimmy’s truthful

narration in EXHIBIT “D” certainly terrified Pasok but that injury was not
legal injury that warrants money. Pasok’s hurt is damnum absque injuria. The
court give no redress for hardships and miseries resulting from exercise of
rights and duties of citizenship. Que Jure Suo Utittus Nullu Damnum Facit –
One who exercise a right injuries no one.

4. In Amonoy vs. Gutierrez, 351 SCRA-731, the SC said: “Well-

settled is the maxim that damage resulting from the legitimate exercise of a
person’s right is a loss without injury-Damnum absque injuria for which the
law gives no remedy.”

5. So from the pleadings, testimony of Pasok and his exhibits and

from the complete evidence for the defense of the Dino brothers, and from
all the evidence on record we find that Pasok has no cause of action for the
misery, he has undergone since December 1, 2004; they are all damnum

4
absque injuria from which the law does not give redress. Further Jimmy
exercised his duty and right to be a witness to any incident that disturbs the
peace of society, hence Jimmy is deemed to have exercised his right and
duty of citizenship. Jimmy is a good citizen adverted to by the Court.

WHEREFORE, it is prayed that this case be dismissed and Pasok be

ordered to pay Jimmy actual damages consisting of attorney’s fees, actual
expenses incurred since 21 May 2007 in defending this case up to the forum.
Pasok will drag Jimmy, plus moral damages for the anxiety suffered,
exemplary and punitive damages for filling this baseless complaint, in the
total amount of ₱300,000.00 and praying further for such relief just and
proper in the premises.

General Santos City for Tacurong City, April ___, 2019.

ORLANDO A. OCO
TIN: 131-778-274 / PTR No. 8414910 Dec. 27, 2018
IBP No. 62333 Jan. 04, 2019 / Attorney’s Roll No. 14862
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0008591 May 21, 2018
Email add: orlyoco_0109@yahoo.com
No. 49 South Osmeña Street, General Santos City
Telephone No. (083) 553-9334

JIMMY LIU
PhilHealth ID No. 19-089911153-6

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ___ day of April

2019 at General Santos City. Affiant having been identified to me through
his identification card as stated below his name. WITNESS MY HAND
AND SEAL.

ORLANDO A. OCO
Notary Public until December 31, 2019
PNC No. 17-38 TIN: 131-778-274
Doc No. ___ PTR No. 8414910 Dec. 27, 2018
Page No. ___ IBP No. 62333 Jan. 04, 2019
Book No. 44 Attorney’s Roll No. 14862
Series of 2019 MCLE Compliance No. VI-0008591 May 21, 2018
Email add: orlyoco_0109@yahoo.com
No. 49 South Osmeña Street, General Santos City
Telephone No. (083) 553-9334

5
 EXPLANATION

Copy of this PETITION TO ADMIT M.R. AGAINST THE

MARCH 18, 2019 ORDER, MEMORANDUM AND SUPPLEMENTAL
MEMO, ETC was served to the Regional Trial Court Branch 20, Tacurong
City, Atty. German Operiano and to Atty. Rutillo Pasok through registered
mail because of distance.

ORLANDO A. OCO

Copy furnished:

1. ATTY. GERMAN OPERIANO

Surallah, South Cotabato
Registry Receipt No. __________
Dated: April ___, 2019

2. ATTY. RUTILLO PASOK

Tacurong City
Registry Receipt No. __________
Dated: April ___, 2019

6
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)
City of General Santos )s.s.
x-------------------------------------------x

AFFIDAVIT OF PROOF OF SERVICE

I, KAREN PEARL G. SUCALDITO, of legal age, Filipino, single

and with office address at J. Gonzalez Law Office, No. 49, South Osmena
Street, General Santos City, after having been sworn to in accordance with
law, hereby depose and say:

That I am the office secretary of Atty. Orlando A. Oco;

That on March 8, 2019, I caused the service of the PETITION TO

ADMIT M.R. AGAINST THE MARCH 18, 2019 ORDER,
MEMORANDUM AND SUPPLEMENTAL MEMO, ETC to Atty.
German Operiano through registered mail with registry receipt number
_________________ and Atty. Rutillo Pasok through registered mail with
registry receipt number _________________;

That I am executing this affidavit to attest to the truth of the foregoing

statements.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day

of March 2019, at General Santos City.

KAREN PEARL G. SUCALDITO

Affiant
SSS No. 09-3785018-7

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 8th day of March

2019 at General Santos City, affiant having been identified to me through
her competent proof of identity as indicated below her name.

WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL.