Republic of the Philippines

Regional Trial Court

6th Judicial Region
Branch 43-Bacolod City
-oOoMARIA M. SANTOS,
Petitioner,

-versus-

Civil Case No. 14-2169

WILSON SANTOS,
Respondent.
X------------------------------------------X

ANSWER WITH
SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSES
Respondent,
WILSON
SANTOS,
through
the
undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable Court, most
respectfully manifests and avers, to wit:
TIMELINESS OF THE ANSWER
1.
Copy of the Summons dated 12th of January 2015
from this Honorable Court was received by Respondent
Wilson Santos (hereinafter referred to as Respondent for
brevity), last January 13, 2015, giving Respondent fifteen
(15) days after service to file his Answer;
2.
The filing of this Answer with Special and
Affirmative Defenses today, January 23, 2015, is therefore
deemed timely for all legal intents and purposes;

ADMISSIONS AND SPECIFIC DENIALS OF THE

MATERIAL ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT
3.
The personal circumstances of the Petitioner and
Respondent as stated in Paragraphs 1 to 3 of the Petition are
admitted;
4.
Paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12,
respectively, of the Petition are admitted, with qualifications
found in the Special and Affirmative Defenses herein;
5.
Other than the allegations in Paragraph 13 that
Petitioners parents were against the relationship of
Petitioner and Respondent, the rest of the allegations is
denied;
6.
Paragraphs 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 are
admitted;
7.
Paragraph 20 of the Petition is specifically denied,
the truth being that stated in the Affirmative and Special
Defenses herein;
8.

Paragraphs 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25 are admitted;

9.
Paragraphs 26, 27 and 28 are specifically and
vehemently denied except the fact that Petitioner and
Respondent were always rushing, busy and arguing;
10. Paragraphs 29 and 30 are specifically denied for
lack of information or knowledge sufficient to form a belief
as to the truth or falsity thereof;
11. Paragraph 31 is specifically and vehemently
denied, the truth being that Respondent gave all that he
could to provide for his familys needs;
12. Save for the fact that there were instances when
Respondent would go home late due to work, the rest of the
allegations in Paragraphs 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 and
2

40 are denied for lack of information or knowledge sufficient

to form a belief as to the truth or falsity thereof;
13.
With respect to the allegation in Paragraph 41,
the same is admitted except for the fact that Respondent
asked Petitioner to leave while he stayed behind, the truth
being that it was Petitioner who voluntarily and willingly left;
14. The allegations in Paragraphs 42, 43, 44, 45 and
46 are denied, the truth being that stated in the Affirmative
and Special Defenses herein;
15. The allegations in Paragraphs 47, 48 and 49 are
denied, the truth being based on that which are stated in the
Special and Affirmative Defenses herein;
16. The allegations in Paragraphs 50, 51, 52, 53, 54,
55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 and 61 are specifically and
vehemently denied, the truth being that stated in the
Affirmative and Special Defenses stated herein;
17. Paragraph 62 is admitted.
SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
18. The Petition filed by Petitioner reeks of
suppression of certain facts that would work disfavor on
Respondents part;
19. Petitioner failed to asseverate in her Petition her
own shortcomings and attributed all the blame to
Respondent in order to emancipate herself from the
marriage;
20. During their fights, Respondent, out of infuriation
at the nagging of his wife, would be forced to raise his voice
to get Petitioners attention and for the latter to listen to
him;

21. Raising ones voice is not tantamount to verbal

abuse as Petitioner would like this Court to believe.
Respondent merely wanted peace and quiet in their
household, but Petitioner would not even hear Respondents
side;
22. Respondent went home late several times because
of work, but Petitioner would not even listen to Respondents
explanation. Petitioner could not be reasoned with;
23. She simply did not accord Respondent the respect
and dignity due him as a husband, but treated him as a
persona non-grata;
24. Petitioner would also always be suspicious of
Respondent to the extent of absurdity. Her distrust caused
her to be jealous of and suspect every woman acquainted
with Respondent;
25. Respondent is not a womanizer as Petitioner
imputes, but the formers work in local government
frequently exposes him to gossip linking him to various
women;
26. Due to extreme animosities, Respondent left the
conjugal abode for a cooling off period;
27. During the time that Respondent was away, he
never failed to send money to his children. He did not send
it directly to Petitioner because of the enmity between them,
but he made sure that his children received financial
support. Contrary to Petitioners erroneous allegations,
Respondent was never remiss on his familial obligations;
28. Thus, it is ultimately submitted that the Petition
filed by Petitioner is nothing but a malicious lawsuit to
harass Respondent.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Respondent
most respectfully prays that the Petition be DENIED.
Other relief and remedies, just and proper under the
premises are likewise prayed for.
Most respectfully submitted this 23 January 2015,
Bacolod City, Philippines.

JUAN DELA CRUZ

Counsel for Respondent
ROLL NO. 59881
PTR No. 5451418; 01-08-15
IBP OR No. 929399; 01-08-15
MCLE COMP. IV-0023148; 03-03-14
#2 Katalbas Apartment, Margarita St.,
Brgy. Villamonte, Bacolod City, 6100
COPY FURNISHED:
ATTY. CHRISTIAN E. JALANDONI
Room 4, 2nd Floor Midtown Arcade
Rosario Cor. Araneta Sts., Bacolod City
Received by: ___________
Date: ________________
OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
134 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Village
1229 Makati City
RR No.: _________
Date: ___________
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
3rd Floor, Hall of Justice
6100 Bacolod City
Received by: ___________
Date: _________________
5

EXPLANATION
Copy of the foregoing Answer was furnished to the
Office of the Solicitor General and the address of Petitioner
through registered mail only and not by personal service by
reason of lack of personnel to effect personal form of service
in the address of Petitioner and the prohibitive distance
between Bacolod and the City of Makati.
JUAN DELA CRUZ

-Verification Follows6