Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

DESIGNATED FAMILY COURT
Branch 43, Dagupan City

MARIAN RIVERA
Petitioner,

- versus - CIVIL CASE NO. 1233456-78

FOR: Declaration of Nullity of Marriage

DINGDONG DANTES,
Respondent.

x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

PRE-TRIAL BRIEF

PETITIONER by the undersigned counsel and unto this Honorable Court

most respectfully states:

BRIEF STATEMENT OF PETITIONER’S CLAIMS AND DEFENSES

This is an action for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage under Articles 36 & 68 of

the New Family Code.

1. respondent and petitioner are husband and wife;

2. that both respondent and petitioners are clinically found to be psychologically

incapacitated to comply with the essential requisites of marriage identified as
respondent having Narcissistic Personality Disorder with Anti-Social Traits
while petitioner is suffering with Histrionic Personality Disorder;

3. that the root cause of such illness is traced from their respective childhood;

4. such illness is diagnosed to be grave, serious and incurable;

5. that such illness existed before, at the time of the marriage and during the
marriage.

6. that a child was born in wedlock ;

7. their de-facto separation which culminated from petitioner’s frustration of

respondent’s mercurial change of disposition, abusive and manipulative
conduct, immaturity, excessive spending and adulterous conduct;

8. that respondent failed to give love, emotional support and fidelity to the
marriage;
Page | 1
 9. that respondent denies all the allegations of the Petitioner.

WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO AN AMICABLE SETTLEMENT OR ALTERNATIVE

MODES OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION

a. Subject to a concrete proposal that is fair and reasonable and a reciprocal

manifestation of openness from Respondent, Petitioner is open to the
possibility of amicably settling this dispute
b. Petitioner respectfully submits that the desired terms of any amicable
settlement would involve the dismissal of the petition on the ground of lack of
cause of action, and the payment of damages prayed for.

SUMMARY OF FACTS AND PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS

1. The identity of parties as petitioner and respondent;

2. The fact of marriage, parties having been married on December 02, 2002 ;

3. The a child was born in wedlock;

4. The no property was acquired by both spouses; and,

5. Their de-facto separation and the absence of cohabitation between the spouses.

PROPOSAL FOR ADMISSION

1. that both respondent and petitioners are clinically found to be psychologically

incapacitated to comply with the essential requisites of marriage identified as
respondent having Narcissistic Personality Disorder with Anti-Social Traits while
petitioner is suffering with Histrionic Personality Disorder;

2. that the said disorder of the respondent is grave, serious and incurable.

3. That the respondent and the petitioner are both psychologically incapacitated to
comply with the requisites of marriage.

ISSUES TO BE TRIED OR RESOLVED

Page | 2
 Whether or not respondent is psychologically incapacitated to comply with the
essential requisites of marriage which is a valid ground under Art. 36 and 68 of
the New Family Code to declare the marriage a nullity.

DOCUMENTS OR EXHIBITS TO BE PRESENTED

1. Marriage Contract ----Exhibit "A"

Purpose: To prove the existence of the marriage between the petitioner and the
respondent

2. Birth Certificate of child-----Exhibits "B"

Purpose: To prove that the child was born in wedlock prior to the marriage of the
respondent and petitioner

3. The Psychological Report-----Exhibit "C”

Purpose: To prove that both respondent and petitioners are clinically found to be
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential requisites of marriage
identified as Narcissistic Personality Disorder with Anti-Social Traits while
petitioner is suffering with Histrionic Personality Disorder and that the said
disorder is grave, serious and incurable.

A MANIFESTATION OF THEIR HAVING AVAILED OF OR THEIR INTENTION TO

AVAIL DISCOVERY PROCEDURE OR REFERRAL TO A COMMISIONER

a. Considering the relatively simple issues presented, Respondent does not intend
to avail of discovery at this time.

b. Subject, however, to a concrete and reasonable request for discovery from

Petitioner, Respondent reserves the right to resort to discovery before trial.

NUMBER AND NAMES OF WITNESSES AND THE SUBSTANCE OF THEIR

RESPECTIVE TESTIMONIES

Petitioner intends to present three (2) witnesses, to wit:

1. Marian Rivera, petitioner

2. Pauleen Luna, clinical psychologist

Petitioner will be testifying on the allegations in the Petition and will present
documentary evidence. The Clinical Psychologist who will testify on the
psychological evaluation done on both petitioner and respondent.

Petitioner Marian Rivera, reserves the right to present any and all
documentary evidence , which shall become relevant to rebut respondent’s
witnesses ’, if necessary.

APPLICABLE LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE

Page | 3
1. Provisions on the Family Code

2. Applicable laws and jurisprudence relevant on the matter.

AVAILABILITY FOR TRIAL

The petitioner needs at least five (5) trial dates to present its case to be
agreed upon during the Pre-trial Conference.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED to this Honorable Court this 19 th day of April

2014 at Justice Hall, Dagupan City, Philippines.

ATTY. GLAIZA MAE G. MASAOY

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

Copy furnished:

Atty. Lilibeth Palado --------------------------Personal Service

Counsel for the Respondent
Palado and Associates
Asingan, Pangasinan

Office of the City Prosecutor ------------------- Personal Service

Dagupan City

Office of the Solicitor General ----------Registered Mail w/ Return Card

135 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Vill.,
Makati City
EXPLANATION

Pursuant to the Provision of Rule 13, Section 11 of the 1997 Rules in Civil
Procedure as Amended, undersigned submits this Explanation that the service of
this Pre- Trial was to Office of the Solicitor General by Registered Mail instead of
personal serve in view of lack of manpower.

Page | 4
Page | 5