TEOFISTO I. VERCELES v. MARIA CLARISSA POSADA, et al.

G.R. SP. 159785, 27 April 2007, Quisumbing, J. (Second Division)

“It is not the caption but the facts alleged which give meaning to a pleading.

Courts are called upon to pierce the form and go into the substance thereof. There is

nothing in law or jurisprudence that entitles the parents of a consenting adult who begets

a love child to damages. “

FACTS:

Respondent Maria Clarissa Posada, a young lass from the barrio of Pandan,

Catanduanes, met a close family friend, petitioner Teofisto Verceles, mayor of Pandan.

He then offered Posada a job. Posada accepted Verceles’s offer and worked as a casual

employee in the mayor’s office. Along with some other employees, Posada accompanied

Vereceles to Legaspi City to attend a seminar on town planning. One day, Verceles

started to make amorous advances on her. She panicked, and hurriedly left the hotel.

Afraid of the mayor, she kept the incident to herself. She went on as a casual employee.

One of her tasks was following-up barangay road and maintenance projects.

On orders of Verceles. Posada went to Virac. Catanduanes to follow up funds for

barangay projects. She went to Catanduanes Hotel on instructions oí Verceles who asked to be

briefed on the progress of her mission. They met at the lobbv and he led her upstairs because he

said he wanted the briefing done at the restaurant at the upper floor. Instead, however, Verceles

opened a hotel room door, led her in, and suddenlv embraced her. As he told her that he was

unhappy with his wife and would divorce` her anytime. He also claimed he could appoint her as

a municipal development coordinator. She succumbed to his advances. But again she kept the

incident to herself. Posada missed her menstruation and she wrote Verceles that she feared she
was pregnant. In a handwritten letter, Verceles told Posada that he should have no regrets

should she become pregnant even unexpectedly, and that they shall both take care of the child.

Posada explained Verceles used an alias Ninoy` and addressed her as ( probably

because of their 25-year age gap. In court. Posada identiíied Verceles`s penmanship which she

claims she was íamiliar with as an emplovee in his office. On September 23. 1987. she gave birth

to a baby girl. Verna Aiza Posada. The Posadas filed a complaint for Damages coupled with

Support Pendente lite before the RTC Virac Catanduanes against Verceles. The trial court issued

a judgment in favour of the Posadas. The CA affirmed the judgment oí the RTC ordering

Verceles to pay a monthlv support to Verna Aiza Posada from her birth and to pay damages to

Maria Clarissa and her parents.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not paternity and filiation can be resolved in an action for damages with

support pendente lite .

2. Whether or not the filiation of Verna Aiza Posada as the illegitimate child of petitioner

was proven.

3. Whether or not respondents are entitled to damages

HELD:

In determining the nature of an action, it is not the caption, but the averments in the

petition and the character of the relief sought, that are controlling.

A perusal of the complaint before the RTC shows that although its caption states

Damages coupled with Support Pendente lite`. Posada`s averments therein all clearly established

a case for recognition of paternity. This Court has held that the due recognition of an illegitimate

child in a record of birth, a will, a statement before a court of record or in any authentic writing
is in itself a consummated act of acknowledgment of the child and no further court action is

required. In fact, any authentic writing is treated not just a ground for compulsory recognition: it

is in itself a voluntary recognition that does not require a separate action for judicial approval.

The letters are private handwritten instruments of Verceles which establish Verna Aiza`s

filiation under Article 122, of the family code. In addition the array of evidence presented by

respondents, the dates, letters, pictures and testimonies to us are convincing and irrefutable

evidence that Verna Aiza is indeed Verceles`s illegitimate child. Verceles not only failed to rebut

the evidence presented, he himself presented no evidence of his own. His bare denials are telling.

However, we cannot rule that the Posadas are entitled to damages. Article 2219 of the

civil code which states moral damages may be recovered in cases of seduction is inapplicable in

this case because Clarissa was already an adult at the time she had an affair with Verceles.

Neither can her parents be entitled to damages. Respondents Constantino and Francisca Posada

have not cited any law or jurisprudence to justify awarding damages to them.