Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES

8h Judicial Region
Calbayog City

HMW LENDING INVESTORS, INC.,

Plaintiff, CIVIL CASE NO. 2018-556SCC

For: SUM OF MONEY

-versus-

MARILOU E. PORLARES,
Defendant.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

SHERIFF’S RETURN OF Summons

THIS IS TO CERTIFY that after repeated attempts at personal service, the

undersigned served the summons on December 8, 2018, at defendant’s given address
at Brgy. Trinidad, Calbayog City in the following manner:

That the summons issued in the above-entitled case together with a copy of the
statement of claim with its annexes were served upon defendant MARILOU E.
PORLARES thru her husband VERGILIO PORLARES, a person residing thereat, of
sufficient age and discretion to receive such court process who REFUSED to
acknowledge receipt thereof.

That substituted service was resorted to because as per information given by VER
PORLARES her wife MARILOU PORLARES was in their room as the latter was
suffering from ill health.

That prior repeated attempts at personal service had already been made but failed
because the defendant was then absent at the address stated. Considering that
VERGILO PORLARES insisted on claiming that undersigned must not give the
summons to herein defendant MARILOU PROLARES for she was very ill, undersigned
not only acquainted said VIRGILIO PORLARES with the nature of the paper and the
purpose of making the service but also explained to him that her wife was served with
summons precisely to give her notice that a complaint had been filed against her,
thereby putting her on guard as to the claim of the plaintiff.
Despite of the fact that said VIRGILO PORLARES initially refused to receive the
summons and did not sign to acknowledge receipt of the summons on behalf of her wife
MARILOU PORLARES, he actually took the summons and the copy of the statement of
claim, read the same, and thereby informed himself of the contents of the said
documents.

WHEREFORE, the original copy of the aforesaid summons is now hereby

respectfully returned, DULY SERVED.

Calbayog City, Samar, this 7th day of January, 2019.

 GARY R. MOLOBOCO
Sheriff III

Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES
8th Judicial Region
Calbayog City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Complainant,

-versus- CRIM. CASE NO. 132174

For: Violation of Bp 22

MARTIN S. DURMIENDO,
Accused.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

SHERIFF’S RETURN OF Summons

THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on March 19, 2019 at around 3:51 in the afternoon, when a
copy of the ORDER dated March 6, 2019 issued by the Hon. MARGARET N. ARMEA,
Presiding Judge of the MTCC, 5th Judicial Region, Branch 2, Naga City in Criminal Case No.
132174 for Violation of BP 22 together with a copy of the INFORMATION and likewise a
copy of the ORDER setting this case for arraignment therewith accompanying was brought in
order to serve on the accused MARTIN S. DORMIENDO at his place of business at TOTAL
CALBAYOG, Maharlika Highway, Brgy. Obrero, Calbayog City, Samar, undersigned didn’t get
a chance to serve the aforesaid order and the annexes attached thereto. because MARTIN S.
DORMIENDO left his office in a hurry, his excuse being that he was busy at that time due to
pressures of urgent work and prior commitments as the latter is running for city council in the
City of Calbayog and instead of receiving said court processes, he asked the undersigned to
come again after their opening salvo on the 29th of March, 2019.
 On April 5, 2019 undersigned came back at Total Gas Station owned by Mr. Martin
Dormiendo but I was informed by his employee in the person of Mr. EFREN VERANO that Mr.
MARTIN DORMIENDO was so busy that often he did not have any opportunity to go back to
the Total Gas Station as it was already campaign period and that there was no one in the gas
station authorized to receive the aforesaid ORDER. On April 15, 2019, at around 2:30 in the
afternoon, undersigned tried again to serve the same process to Mr. Martin Dormiendo but with
the same result.

Finally, on April 22, 2019, the undersigned went back to the said gas station to personally
serve the ORDER together with the other pertinent document, just the same, undersigned found
Mr. Martin Dormiendo absent, hence, service was effected by leaving
the aforesaid Order and all the documents thereto attached in accused’s given address at Total
Calbayog City, at around 9:00 a.m. of the same day with a certain HEIZEL FAILON, cashier
and a competent person in charged of the Total Gas Station, however, she refused to
acknowledge receipt of the said ORDER.

Calbayog City, Samar, for Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 02, Naga City , this
25th day of April, 2019.

GARY R. MOLOBOCO
Sheriff III

alias Summons dated September 9, 2008 issued in the above-entitled case

together with a copy of the complaint and annexes attached thereto was brought for
service to the President/General manager of CARSON REALTY & MANAGEMENT
CORP., in the person of marcial M. Samson and/or Nieva A. Cabrera at its office
address at Unit 601 Prestige tower condominium, emerald avenue, Ortigas center, 1605
Pasig city, undersigned was informed by the secretary of the company in the person of
Ms. Vina Azona that the abovementioned persons were not around and that there was
no one in the company authorized to received the aforesaid summons. That the
undersigned went back to the said office on October 16, 2008 at around 3:08 in the
afternoon and wasentered by Ms. Lorie Fernandez, also an employee of the company
who is authorized to receive the said process. On October 27, 2008, at around 2:23 in
the afternoon, undersigned tried again to served the same process to the President/
General Manager of carson realty & management corp. but with the same result.

Finally, on October 28, 2008 at around 1:03 in the afternoon, the undersigned
went back to the said company to personally serve the Alias Summons together with the
other pertinent document, just the same, the president/General manager of the
company was not around, hence, substituted service of summons was resorted to by
leaving the copy of the alias summon’s at the company’s office through its employee,
MS. LORIE FERNANDEZ, however, she refused to acknowledge receipt of the process.

SHERIFF’S RETURN OF SERVICE

COMES NOW, the undersigned Sheriff of MTCC, Calbayog City and unto this
Honorable Court, respectfully states (avers):
 1. That on September 8, 2012, a copy of the summons was served by the
undersigned Sheriff, but it canot be served to the accused personally as the
latter is often out.
2. That considering that personal service cannot be effected, said Order was
served through Substituted CService.
3. Copy of the Order was served to accused by substituted service due to time
and distance constraint s the latter is alleged to be now in Taff, Eastern
samar, and for lack of the undersigned’s material time to serve the same in
person.
4. The cashier received the subpoena on _____ and there has until _____ w/in
w/c to submit his counter-affidavit, thus she refused to acknpwledge receipt
by claiming that, Mr. dormiendo (due to pressures of equally urgent
professional work and prior commitments, the undersigned counsel will not be
able to meet the said deadline.

 I didn’t have or I didn’t get a chance to see her last week.

 I wanted to see you, but I didn’t have the chance.
“chance” is a verb in some contexts, a noun in others. As a verb it is followed by
“to + verb”, and means “verb by chance”, for example, “chanced to see”
means saw by chance” “happen to’ can be substituted for ‘chance to”.

While on my way to the clinic, I chanced to see or happened to see a

wallet lying on the ground.

“Chance’ as a verb has no passive; am chanced’, ‘was chanced’, etc. are not
standard English expressions.
 The person to whom I gave the money said his name was Audu.
 I wanted to see you, but I didn’t have the opportunity.
 The doctor is busy at present. Come again later.
 He left the meeting in a hurry, his excuse being that he had to take his wife
t hospital.
 Instead of receiving the subpoena, martin simply dismissed him.
 He felt ill, and asked them to excuse him in the meeting.
 They came to my house, but found me absent.
 I was so busy that I simply did not have any opportunity to go back to the
bank.
 ncumbent Quezon City councilor and showbiz personality
Roderick Paulate filed his certificate of candidacy on October 11
for the post of Quezon City vice mayor. He is the official running
mate of former Rep. Chuck Mathay, who hopes to follow in his
late father Mel Mathay’s footsteps in leading Metro Manila’s
largest and most populous cit
 he is running for city council in the City of Calbayog. Run for city
councilman
 City/Municipal Councilor, 

SHERIFF’S RETURN OF SERVICE

THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on ____________ the undersigned served the summons together with
a copy of the Complaint, personally upon the defendant ______________ at __________ through
_________________________, a person in charge of the defendant’s office or regular place of business,
who signed/ refused to acknowledge receipt thereof.

Substituted service was resorted to because defendant cannot be promptly served in person for
the following reasons: __________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________

The original copy of the summons is, therefore, respectfully returned, DULY SERVED.

Dated this _______ of April, 2019.

GARY R. MOLOBOCO
Sheriff III

Section 4. Publication of notice of appeal. — If personal service of the copy of the notice of appeal
can not be made upon the adverse party or his counsel, service may be done by registered mail or
by substituted service pursuant to sections 7 and 8 of Rule 13. (4a)

Section 3. Procedure. — The preliminary investigation shall be conducted in the following manner:

(a) The complaint shall state the address of the respondent and shall be accompanied by the
affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses, as well as other supporting documents to
establish probable cause. They shall be in such number of copies as there are respondents,
plus two (2) copies for the official file. The affidavits shall be subscribed and sworn to before
any prosecutor or government official authorized to administer oath, or, in their absence or
unavailability, before a notary public, each of who must certify that he personally examined
the affiants and that he is satisfied that they voluntarily executed and understood their
affidavits.

(b) Within ten (10) days after the filing of the complaint, the investigating officer shall either
dismiss it if he finds no ground to continue with the investigation, or issue a subpoena to the
respondent attaching to it a copy of the complaint and its supporting affidavits and
documents.

The respondent shall have the right to examine the evidence submitted by the complainant
which he may not have been furnished and to copy them at his expense. If the evidence is
voluminous, the complainant may be required to specify those which he intends to present
against the respondent, and these shall be made available for examination or copying by the
respondent at his expense.

Objects as evidence need not be furnished a party but shall be made available for
examination, copying, or photographing at the expense of the requesting party.

(c) Within ten (10) days from receipt of the subpoena with the complaint and supporting
affidavits and documents, the respondent shall submit his counter-affidavit and that of his
witnesses and other supporting documents relied upon for his defense. The counter-
affidavits shall be subscribed and sworn to and certified as provided in paragraph (a) of this
section, with copies thereof furnished by him to the complainant. The respondent shall not be
allowed to file a motion to dismiss in lieu of a counter-affidavit.

(d) If the respondent cannot be subpoenaed, or if subpoenaed, does not submit counter-
affidavits within the ten (10) day period, the investigating officer shall resolve the complaint
based on the evidence presented by the complainant.
 (e) The investigating officer may set a hearing if there are facts and issues to be clarified
from a party or a witness. The parties can be present at the hearing but without the right to
examine or cross-examine. They may, however, submit to the investigating officer questions
which may be asked to the party or witness concerned.

The hearing shall be held within ten (10) days from submission of the counter-affidavits and
other documents or from the expiration of the period for their submission. It shall be
terminated within five (5) days.

(f) Within ten (10) days after the investigation, the investigating officer shall determine
whether or not there is sufficient ground to hold the respondent for trial. (3a)

How to File a Criminal Case in the Philippines

If you are a victim of crime or felony in the Philippines, it is wise to report the crime or felony with the barangay
and police authorities. Thereafter, you must secure a barangay blotter and police blotter or report so that you may
use them as evidences. If you sustained injuries, go to a government hospital to have yourself checked out. The
medical report of said hospital will be very useful to prove your physical injuries. In addition, ask someone to take
photographs of your injuries as proof.
To enable you to properly lodge a criminal complaint, it is of foremost concern that you secure the services of a
good and efficient Philippine lawyer, attorney or law firm. As you will need to file a Complaint-Affidavit with the
Office of the City Prosecutor where the crime was committed, it is necessary to have your facts straight and
evidences in check. A good criminal lawyer will draft a Complaint-Affidavit which will prove all the elements of the
crime or felony.
After filing your Complaint-Affidavit, the Office of the City Prosecutor will issue a subpoena against the accused,
requiring him to appear on a certain date and time to submit his Counter-Affidavit. Thereafter, you may file a Reply-
Affidavit to controvert the new issues he raised. In the same vein, the accused may file a Rejoinder-Affidavit.
This process is known as preliminary investigation. Preliminary investigation is an inquiry or proceeding to
determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and
the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial. This is a crucial stage in criminal proceedings
because the prosecutor will have to determine whether there is sufficient ground to file an information in court
against the perpetrator. That is why you need to seek expert legal advice and engage the services of Philippine
criminal prosecution lawyers or attorneys to ensure that your criminal complaint is strong and can prove the
elements of the crime.
If there are no sufficient grounds, then the prosecutor will dismiss the case. As such, the criminal complaint will not
be filed in court. Your criminal lawyer may file a Motion for Reconsideration with the City Prosecutor. If the
Motion is denied, you may seek remedy from the Department of Justice.
If the prosecutor finds probable cause, he will issue a resolution spelling out the reasons for such finding. The
prosecutor will correspondingly file an information in court, with the recommended bail. If the judge in the pertinent
court finds sufficient grounds, he shall issue a warrant of arrest. Except for certain crimes punishable by reclusion
perpetua, when evidence of guilt is strong, the accused may post bail.
Trial will thereafter ensue. It must be emphasized that criminal cases are offenses committed against the state. Thus,
the prosecutor or fiscal will be the one prosecuting the criminal case. However, he may be assisted by private
prosecutors. In view of the known fact that prosecutors are laden with heavy work load, it is best to secure your own
private lawyer in the Philippines who can give your concerns the appropriate attention and detail.
Nicolas & De Vega Law Offices is a full service law firm in the Philippines. You may visit us at the 16th Flr., Suite
1607 AIC Burgundy Empire Tower, ADB Ave., Ortigas Center, 1605 Pasig City, Metro Manila, Philippines. You
may also call us at +632 4706126, +632 4706130, +632 4016392.

Don't Ignore That Subpoena

Phil-Am Law 101 by Atty. Rogelio Karagdag, Jr., Member, State Bar of
California & Integrated Bar of the Philippines

Don't Ignore That Subpoena

A client sought our legal advice about a subpoena she had received
from a prosecutor in the Philippines. It said that the client was being
charged with the crime of perjury for allegedly making false statements
under oath and was being asked to submit her counter-affidavit. It turns
out that during her last vacation to the Philippines, the client did her civic
duty of submitting an affidavit in a pending criminal investigation. The
client was inclined to ignore the subpoena; after all, she is now in the
United States and has no immediate plans of going back to the
Philippines. The client thought that if she just ignores the subpoena, the
case will go away and the complainant will get tired and just give up
running after her. I took a look at the subpoena. It was contained in a
white “air mail” envelope. It was sent only by regular, not registered mail.
Without a return card, the prosecutor would have no way of knowing or
proving that the client received the subpoena. Ordinarily, such would be
fatal to the complainant’s case as it would violate my client’s due
process rights. 

Still, we advised the client not to ignore the subpoena and to submit her
counter-affidavit in the case. I explained to the client that failure to
respond to a subpoena would result to dire consequences. This is
because the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure of the Philippines has
a provision which says that a criminal case can be filed in Court if the
respondent could not be subpoenaed, even without actual notice to the
respondent. Thus, Rule 112, Section 3(d) provides “if the respondent
cannot be subpoenaed, or if subpoenaed, does not submit counter-
affidavits within the ten (10) day period, the investigating office shall
resolve the complaint based on the evidence presented by the
complainant.” We explained to the client that even if it the prosecutor
had not sent her subpoena, the criminal case could still be filed against
her because she could not be served with a subpoena in the Philippines.
(The Rule on service of summons regarding civil cases is different as it
requires summons by extraterritorial service)

Accordingly, what we did was to enter our appearance as the attorney

for the client. Thereupon, we filed a very strong counter-affidavit with all
the necessary supporting documents. The counter-affidavit was
notarized in San Diego and authenticated by the Philippine consulate in
Los Angeles. It was important to authenticate the counter-affidavit for it
to be admissible as evidence in the Philippines. We submitted the
counter-affidavit through our office in Manila. Then, after a few weeks,
our Manila office faxed to us a resolution from the prosecutor. The case
was being dismissed on the very grounds we cited in the counter-
affidavit.

Imagine what would have happened had the client chose to ignore the
subpoena? With the uncontested complaint, the prosecutor would be
forced to file a criminal case against her in court. In turn, the court would
have no choice but to issue a warrant for her arrest. With the warrant
outstanding, the police would be waiting to pounce on her upon her
return. Once arrested, the client would be forced to post bail for her
provisional liberty and defend herself in court. The court might even
prevent her from leaving the Philippines until the case is over. She would
practically be spending all her vacation time, and beyond, attending to
her criminal case. 

So, please, do not ignore that subpoena. It is better to address any

problem at its early stage. Better yet, consult first a lawyer before you
sign any legal papers. The client should be commended for testifying in
the criminal investigation, but her sworn statement could have been
written in a better way. Had she consulted us beforehand, we would
have made sure that the other side would have a very difficult time
dragging her into the case.