Form 30 40

NOTICE OF DEATH OF PARTY
Republic of the Philippines

Municipal Trial Court
Mamburao, Occ. Mindoro
JOSE DE LA CRUZ,
Plaintiff,
-versus- Civil Case No.32

For: Sum of Money
PEDRO MENDOZA,
Defendant
x------------------------------------x
NOTICE OF DEATH OF PARTY
The undersigned counsel for plaintiff, hereby gives notice that JOSE
DE LA CRUZ died on February 16, 2019, his death certificate being
attached hereto as Annex “A”.
The heirs or representatives of said deceased are the following:
1. TRU DELA CRUZ resident of Purok 1, Mamburao Occ.

Mindoro
2. WILL DELA CRUZ resident of Purolk 1, Mamburao Occ.
Mindoro
Mamburao, Occ. Mindoro, February 20,2019.
RICA KAYE O. LOMIBAO

IBP No. 119739 CAVITE CHAPTER
PTR No. 3181314, Imus City, 1-11-12
Attorney’s Roll No. 58500
MCLE Compliance No. VI-1111201
Copy furnished:
Atty. Marilen Saniel
Counsel for defendant
Bgy. San Pedro, Mindoro
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, Speedy Gonzales, messenger of Atty. Rica Kaye Lomibao,

herein counsel for the late Jose de la Cruz, hereby certify that I
personally delivered Plaintiff’s Notice of Death of Party dated 20
February 2019 to Atty. Marilen Saniel, counsel for the Defendant,
with address Bgy. San Pedro, Mindoro
SPEEDY GONZALES
COMPLAINT ALLEGING DIFFERENT CAUSES OF ACTION

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 40
Manila
Delfin Padilla,
Plaintiff, Civil Case No.423
-versus-
Jose Del Rosario,
Defendant
x------------------------------------------------x
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, Delfin Padilla, by undersigned counsel and to

this Honorable Court, respectfully states:
1. Plaintiff is of legal age, married, and with residence at Real

St.,Sampaloc, Manila, while defendant Jose del Rosario is also
of legal age, single and with residence at 26 Maria Clara St.,
Sampaloc, Manila, where he may be served with summons and
other legal processes.
2. Plaintiff and defendant are business partners, loosely doing
business under the informal name, ABC Partnership, which is
not registered as such, with offices at Real St., Sta. Cruz,
Manila, engaged in general merchandising, with deendant as
manager and cashier.
3. Plaintiff and defendant contributed P1,000,000.00 each or a
total of P2,000,000.00, to carry on their business of general
merchandising, agreeing to divide the profits between them on
a 50-50 basis, and said total amount was entrusted to defendant
for such purpose, with an obligation to make yearly accounting.
4. The general merchandising business grew until, by December
0f 2003, when defendant made an accounting, it has
accumulated a total of P10,000.00 cash savings and profits.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

5. In December 2004, plaintiff asked defendant to make an
accounting of their business, but this time defendant refused,
claiming that the business has, by then, become bankrupt.
6. Notwithstanding repeated an account of their business.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

7. Plaintiff repleads all thr foregoing allegations as if copied in
full herein.
8. Plaintiff’s examination of the business records disclosed that
defendant had appropriated upon himself, without the
knowledge, much less consent of plaintiff, the exorbitant
amount of P100,000 allowances and representation expenses
per amount beginning January 2004, to plaintiff’s prejudice and
damages as he has not been paid nor given any allowance and
representation expense.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, all premises considered, plaintiff respectfully prays

for judgement:
a. Under the First Cause of Action, ordering defendant to

render a complete accounting of the business venture of
plaintiff and defendant doing general business
merchandising under the name of ABC Partnership;
b. Under the Second Cause of Action, holding defendant liable
for P2,400,000.00, which he unlawful appropriated for
himself for two years being January 2003, with legal interest
thereon until fully paid;
c. Plaintiff prays for such other reliefs as may be just and
equitable in the premises.
Manila, Janary 15, 2005

PTR No. 3181314, Imus City, 1-11-12
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM

SHOPPING
I, DELFIN PADILAA, Filipino, single, legal age and is

currently residing at 26 Maria Clara St. Sampaloc, Manila,Philippines,
underoath, depose and say that:
1. I am the plaintiff in the above-entitled case;

2. I caused the preparations of the foregoing Complaint;
3. I have not heretofore commenced any other actions or proceedings
involving the same issue in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or
any other tribunal or agency;
4. To the best of my knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending
in the Supreme Court,Court of Appeals, or any other tribunals or
agency;
5. If I should hereafter learn that of any similar action or proceeding has
been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court,Court of Appeals,
or any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to report the fact within
five (5) days therefrom to the Honorable Court.
IN TRUTH WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature below
this 13th day of January 2005, at Sampaloc, Manila.
DELFIN PADILLA
Affiant
Passport No.P61197641 Valid until February 20,2005
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, by the above named

affiant, this January 13, 2005 who is personally known to me and to me
know personally to be the same person who signed this VERIFICATION
AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING in Sampaloc,
Manila, Philippines.
Doc. No. 346

Page No. 91
Book No: 65
Series of 2005

PTR No. 3181314, Imus City, 1-11-12
ANSWER WITH COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM

7th JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 65
City of Naga, Cebu
NATALIA C. SANTOS,
Plaintiff,
-versus-
Civil Case No.___________
For Accion Reivindicatoria,
Quieting of Title and Damages
With Prayer for Preliminary
Mandatory Injunction
JUAN RICARDO G. TORRES,
Defendant.
x--------------------------x
ANSWER
(with Counterclaim)
COMES NOW the Defendant JUAN RICARDO G. TORRES,
represented by the undersigned counsels, before the Honorable Court, most
respectfully submits this Answer with counterclaim, averring that:
ADMISSIONS AND DENIALS
1. The allegations in paragraph 1 of the complaint as to the personal

circumstances of the plaintiff is admitted;
2. Paragraph 2 is admitted;
3. Paragraphs 3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 are denied. As regards the ownership
of the Plaintiff of the subject parcel of land situated at a residential
area in Barangay Pakigne, Minglanilla, Cebu, the Transfer Certificate
of Title attached as Annex A in the complaint is specifically denied
for want of genuineness and authenticity. The Transfer Certificate
Title is just a certified true copy and did not contain the succeeding 3
pages of the title, the original owner’s duplicate copy of such is in the
possession of the defendant;
4. Paragraph 3.2 as regards to the Deed of Absolute Sale attached as

Annex B to B-1 in the complaint is specifically denied for being
spurious the truth being stated in the affirmative and special defenses
hereunder;
Paragraph 3.3 is denied for lack of information or knowledge

sufficient to form a reasonable belief thereof;
Paragraph 3.4 with regard to the Tax Declaration marked as Annex D

in the complaint is specifically denied for want of genuineness and
authenticity, the assessed value in numerical form is inconsistent with
the amount appearing in words, it is provided that the assessed value
is P 37,500.00 but the assessed value in words as stated in the
document is Eighteen Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Pesos Only;
5. Paragraph 4 is denied for lack of information or knowledge sufficient

to form a reasonable belief thereof;
6. Paragraph 5 is denied as to the allegation that defendant intruded in

the lot, the truth being stated in the affirmative and special defenses
hereunder;
7. Paragraph 6 is denied, defendant did not receive any verbal demand

from the Plaintiff;
8. The allegation of the plaintiff in paragraph 7 is likewise denied.

Contrary to the assertion of the plaintiff, the defendant did not receive
any demand letter to vacate the premises. As to the signature
appearing on the Registry Return Receipt in Annex G of the complaint
specifically denied under oath for it appears to be a forged signature
of the defendant, copy of the defendant’s Passport is herein attached
as Annex “A” and the signature as Annex “A-1” and Driver’s License
as Annex “B” and the signature as Annex “B-1” to prove the correct
and authentic signature of the defendant;
9. Paragraph 8 is denied for lack of information or knowledge sufficient

to form a reasonable belief thereof;
10.The allegation on Paragraph 8.1 as to the alleged statement of the

defendant that, “ he would not vacate the lot contending they bought
the same for value from a certain Katrina Ante sometime in 2016” is
specifically denied. The defendant never made such statement; it was
not even mentioned in the minutes provided by the plaintiff in their
complaint in Annex I;
11.Paragraph 8.2 is denied for lack of information and knowledge
sufficient to form reasonable belief thereof ( the plaintiff failed to
attached the said certification in the complaint);
12.Save for the legal provisions quoted in paragraph 9,9.1,9.2,9.3, the

rest of the allegations are denied, the truth being that stated in the
affirmative and special defenses hereunder;
13.Save for the legal provisions quoted in paragraph 10, 10.1,10.2, the
rest of the allegations are denied, the truth being that stated in the
affirmative and special defenses hereunder;
14.Save for the legal provisions quoted in paragraph 11,12,13,14, the rest
are denied, the truth being that stated in the affirmative and special
defenses hereunder. As regards the receipt attached as Annex J in the
complaint, it is specifically denied for want of genuineness and
authenticity for it is not even the official receipt of the concern
Barangay;
15.The allegations in paragraph 15,16,17,18 are denied as the same is an

erroneous conclusion made by the plaintiff;
16.The foregoing are subject to the special and affirmative defenses

hereunder presented.
SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
17.The Plaintiff has NO CAUSE OF ACTION against the

defendants;
Rule 2 of the Rules of Court defines a cause of action as:
Sec.2.Cause of action, defined- A cause of action is the

act or omission by which a party violates of another.
The essential elements of a cause of action are (1) a right

in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under whatever
law it arises or is created; (2) an obligation on the part of the
named defendant to respect or not to violate such right; and (3)
an act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of
the right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the
obligation of the defendant to the plaintiff for which the latter
may maintain an action for recovery of damages or other
appropriate relief.
The Defendant is the absolute and registered owner of the Seventy-Six

(76) Square meter lot situated at a residential area in Barangay Pakigne,
Minglanilla,Cebu. The said lot was purchased by the Defendant from Garry
A. Pogador on May 28,2003; an original copy of the Deed of Absolute
attached herewith and made an integral part hereof as ANNEX “C” to
ANNEX “C-1”.The title to the said lot was transferred to the name on the
defendant on June 7, 2003; a copy of the original owner’s duplicate copy is
attached herewith and made an integral part hereof as ANNEX “D” to
ANNEX “D-1”.
The lot is covered by Tax Declaration of Real Property No. 20-0013-

17460 issued by the Minglanilla Assessor’s Office on October 18, 2012,
with an assessed value of Thirty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Pesos
(P37,500.00); certified Xerox copy from duplicate file is attached herewith
and made an integral part hereof as “ANNEX E”.
Therefore there was no right that was violated on the part of the
plaintiff to speak of since the absolute and registered owner is the defendant
and not the plaintiff.
18.No cloud of Title exists nor is there a need for a quieting of title
that affects the lot mentioned by the Plaintiff in the Complaint.
In order that an action for quieting of title may prosper, two
requisites must concur: (1) the plaintiff or complainant has a
legal or equitable title or interest in the real property subject of
the action; and (2) the deed, claim, encumbrance, or
proceeding claimed to be casting cloud on his title must be
shown to be in fact invalid or inoperative despite is prima facie
appearance of validity or legal efficacy.
Defendant most respectfully submits that the Complaint hardly

qualifies for a quieting of title because they have not established equitable or
legal title to the parcel of land in question.
COUNTERCLAIMS
In the rare event that the Honorable Court shall resolve to proceed
with the trial of the case despite the above special and affirmative
defenses, the Defendant submit the following compulsory
counterclaims and for this purpose, hereby restate and repleads all the
allegations in the preceding paragraphs by way of reference and
incorporation:
1. Due to the plaintiff’s willful and patent disregard of the

defendants’ rights, the defendant suffered inconvenience,
embarrassment and humiliation thereby causing them mental
anguish, serious anxiety, wounded feelings and social humiliation,
resulting in moral damages for which the plaintiff should be held
liable in the amount of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos
(P150,000.00), Philippine currency;
2. To deter others from following after the plaintiffs wanton acts and
evident bad faith, she should be held liable to pay the plaintiff
exemplary damages in the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos
(P50,000.00), Philippine currency, by way of example or
correction for the public good;
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most

respectfully prayed that-
1. The Special and Affirmative shall be immediately set for

preliminary hearing;
2. After the said preliminary hearing, to issue an Order dismissing the
plaintiff’s complaint for Accion Reivindicatoria, Quieting of Title
and Damages and for the issuance of a Writ of Preliminary
Mandatory Injunction;
3. In the remote event that the Honorable Court shall proceed with the
trial, the defendant pray for a judgment denying the reliefs prayed
for by the plaintiff for lack of merit;
4. On the compulsory counterclaims – to order the plaintiff to pay the
defendants-
a. Moral damages in the amount of One Hundred Fifty
Pesos (P150,000.00),Philippine currency;
b. Exemplary damages in the amount of Fifty Thousand
Pesos(P50,000.00), Philippine currency;
c. Attorney’s fee in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand
Pesos (P500,000.00),Philippine currency;
d. Appearance fee of Two Thousand Pesos (P2,000.00)
Philippine currency, per court appearance;
e. Other litigation expenses as may be proved during trial.
Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.
City Naga, Cebu, December 15,2018.

A&A LAW OFFICES
Counsels for the Defendant
4523 Door 4, Diplomat Hotel.,
Ramos St. Cebu City
262-6612
@gmail.com
By:
AIA MARIE COMEDIDO

IBP O.R. NO.3454/12-30-2018/CEBU CITY
PTR O.R.NO.12345/12-30-2018/CEBU CITY
MCLE COMPLIANCE NO.111-12345/December 1,2018
ROLL NO:4565
VERIFICATION
I, JUAN RICARDO G. TORRES, Filipino, single, legal age and is

curretly residing at Purok Narra, West Poblacion, City of Naga, Cebu,Philippines,
underoath, depose and say that:
6. I am the defendant in the above-entitled case;

7. I caused the preparations of the foregoing Answer with Counterclaims’
8. I read all the allegations thereof and that the same are true and correct based on
my own knowledge and authentic records;
9. That Defendant specifically denies under oath the genuineness and due execution
of the instrument a copy of which is attached to Plaintiff’s complaint as Annex
“G”, the truth being that his signature thereon is forged and that he did not in fact
sign the said instrument.
IN TRUTH WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature below this 13th day
of December 2018, at Province of Naga, Cebu.
JUAN RICARDO TORRES
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, by the above named affiant, this
December 13, 2018 who is personally known to me and to me know personally to be
the same person who signed this VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF
NON-FORUM SHOPPING in Province of Naga, Cebu, Philippines.
Doc. No. 347

Page No. 91
Book No: 65
Series of 2018
ERIKA JUDI LOMOCSO
Notary Public
Commission Expires on December 31,2018
IBP O.R.No. 12345/Cebu City/12-13-2018
PTR O.R.No. 34454545/Naga Cebu/12-3-2018
MCLE Compliance No.V-92342445,Cebu City,December 4,2018
Roll.no. 656452
Copy furnished through personal service:
Atty.Rachel E. Bonita
Atty.Richelle Jane Bayona
Atty.Angela Joann G. Canares
Atty.Jose Neil D. Lumongsod
Counsels for the Plaintiff
Suite 205, Silver Tower Bldg.,
Lahug,Cebu City
THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT

RTC BRANCH 65-CITY OF NAGA
Please submit the foregoing for the consideration and approval

immediately upon receipt hereof sans argument and appearance of counsel.
Thank you very much.
Aia Marie Comedido

Counsel for Defendant
Ramos St. Cebu City
ANSWER WITH CROSS-CLAIM

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 1
XIAN LAO,
Plaintiff,
-versus- Civil Case No. 12345
MATEO GO,
Defendant.
x---------------------------------------------------x
ANSWER WITH CROSS-CLAIM
COMES NOW, the defendant, through the undersigned counsel and

unto the Honorable Court, most respectfully avers:
1. That he ADMITS paragraph 2 of the complaint;

2. That he DENIES paragraph 3 of the complaint, the truth being that it
was the defendant JOLO TREVOR who applied for and exclusively
benefited from the loan with the plaintiff, answering defendant acting
as mere co-signer in the promissory note to accommodate defendant
TREVOR and to guarantee the load;
3. That he lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as
to the truth allegations contained in paragraph 3,4, and 5 of the
complaint and therefore, specifically DENIES the same;
SPECIAL/AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
4. That without the knowledge and consent of answering defendant, the

principal condition of the loan was changed and the term of payment
thereof was unreasonably extendend by the plaintiff, to the prejudice
of answering defendant;
5. That there was undue delay on the part of the plaintiff in enforcing the
payment of the obligation, and the loan could have been paid
immediately at maturity had there been prompt and timely notification
to answering defendant of the non-payment of the loan by defendant
TREVOR;
CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST HIS CO-DEFENDANT
6. That defendant TREVOR should reimburse answering defendant on

any and whatever amount the latter may be held answerable or which
he may be ordered or suffered to pay under and by virtue of the
present action in favour of the plaintiff, answering defendant not
having benefited whatsoever from the loan which defendant TREVOR
obtained from the plaintiff;
7. That defendant TREVOR should pay plaintiff directly and fully on the
amounts claimed by the latter in its complain he having benefited
directly and exclusively from the transaction alleged in the complaint;
WHEREFORE, premises considered, answering defendant

respectfully prays to the Honorable Court to render judgment as follows:
1. By dismissing the complaint against answering defendant;

2. By ordering defendant TREVOR to pay directly and fully to the
plaintiff the amounts claimed by the latter in the complaint;
3. By ordering defendant TREVOR to pay answering defendant for an
and whatever amounts the latter may be held liable to or be ordered or
suffered to pay plaintiff under and by virtue of the plaintiff’s claim in
the present action.
Answering defendant prays such other relief and remedies as may be

deemed jus and equitable under premises.
City of Mania, October 1,2012

ERIKA JUDI LOMOCSO
Notary Public
IBP No. 1234512-13-2012
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2012
MCLE Compliance No.V-923445.December 4,2012
Roll.no. 656452

SHOPPING
Republic of the Philippines)

City of Manila ) S.S
I, MATEO GO, Filipino, single, legal age and is currently residing at

234 San Bartolome St., Manila,Philippines, underoath, depose and say that:
1. I am the defendant in the above-entitled case;

2. I caused the preparations of the foregoing Answer;
3. I read all the allegations thereof and that the same are true and correct
based on my own knowledge and authentic records;
4. I have not heretofore commenced any other actions or proceedings
involving the same issue in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or
any other tribunal or agency;
5. To the best of my knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending
in the Supreme Court,Court of Appeals, or any other tribunals or
agency;
6. If I should hereafter learn that of any similar action or proceeding has
been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court,Court of Appeals,
or any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to report the fact within
five (5) days therefrom to the Honorable Court.
IN TRUTH WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature below
this 1st day of October 2012, in the City of Manila.
MATEO GO
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, by the above named

affiant, this October 1, 2012 who is personally known to me and to me
know personally to be the same person who signed this VERIFICATION
AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING in Province of
Naga, Cebu, Philippines.
Doc. No. 346

Page No. 91
Book No: 65
Series of 2012
ERIKA JUDI LOMOCSO

Notary Public
Commission Expires on December
31,2012
IBP No. 1234512-13-2012
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2012
MCLE Compliance No.V-923445.December
4,2012
Roll.no. 656452
Copy Furnished:
Atty. Jade Gayondato
Coune for the Plaintiff
Unit 876 Gayondato Bldg.
Pandacan, Manila
JOLO TREVOR
Defendant
123 Singalong St.
Manila
EXPLANATION
Copy of the ANSWER was server by registered mail due to time and
distance constraints and for luck of the undersigned’s staff who can serve
the same in person.
ZEUS MORALES
MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT

Branch 8
Cebu City
JUAN DELA CRUZ,

Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 12121
-versus- For:Sum of money
PEDRO DEL ROSARIO

Defendant
x-------------------------------x
MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT
Plaintiff, by counsel and to this Honorable Court respectfully states:
Defendant was served with summons on April 5, 2005, as shown by
the return of the sheriff, attached to the court records, notwithstanding
which defendant failed to file his answer to the complaint within rhe 15-
day period therefrom.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays that defendant be declared in the
default and plaintiff be authorized to present his evidence, ex parte,
before the clerk of court on such date as may be fixed, , after which
judgement be rendered against defendant, as prayed for in the complaint.
Cebu City, May 1,2005.

ATTY.ERIKA JUDI LOMOCSO
Notary Public
IBP No. 1234512-13-2012
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2012
Roll.no. 656452
NOTICE OF HEARING
HON.CLERK OF COURT
BR.8
Greetings.
Kindly bring the foregoing motion to attention of the Honorable Court

immediately upon receipt thereof and set the same for hearing on May
10, 2005, 8:30 AM.

Counsel for Plaintiff
IBP No. 1234512-13-2005
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2005
Roll.no. 656452
Please be notified that the foregoing motion will be set for hearing this
10th day of May 2005, 8:30 AM.
COPY FURNISHED:

IBP No. 1234512-13-2005
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2005
Roll.no. 656452
RECIEVED BY:
ATTY.DAVE B. CONSEBIT
Counsel for the Respondent
MOTION TO CANCEL LIS PENDENS

Branch 9
Puerto Princesa City, Palawan
ALEX BERMEJ
Plantiff, Civil Case No.323232
-versus- For:
ROEL PONCE DE LEON

Defendant
MOTION TO CANCEL LIS PENDENS
Plaintiff, by counsel and to this Honorable Court, respectfully

states:
Defendant caused the annotation or registration of a notice of lis

pendens on the subject matter of the instant suit,
2. Defendant caused the recording of the lis pendens for the purpose
of molesting plaintiff, and the recordal thereof is not necessary to
protect his rights to the property, his right thereto, if any, is only
indirect and contingent.
The recordal of the lis pendens is prejudicial to plaintiff’s interest to

the property because, being the owner of said property, it is burden
and it restricts its transferability by sale, as no one will buy it during
the pendency of the case and for as long as the lis pendens is not
canceled.
RELIEF
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that the notice of lis

pendens be ordered cancelled.
Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.
City of Puerto Princesa, December 2, 2013
ATTY. FELY Q. BALADAD

Counsel for the plaintiff
Brgy. San Pedro, Puerto Princesa City
Roll No. 75648
IBP No. 0457 - Palawan,
PTR No. 11456788, issued on April 13, 2012,
MCLE Compliance Cert. No. 66587
NOTICE OF HEARING
Atty. Juan S. Magbanua

Counsel for the defendant
Bgy. San Pedro, Puerto Princesa City
Sir:
Please be informed that the undersigned counsel has set the

foregoing Motion for Reconsideration for hearing on November 25,
2013 at 8:30 am, for the consideration of the Honorable Court or soon
thereafter as counsel maybe heard.
ATTY. FELY Q. BALADAD
Counsel for the Plaintiff

Bgy. Sta. Monica. Puerto Princesa City
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION
Republic of the Philippines)

City of Cebu ) s.s.
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION
I, Juan Dela Cruz, of legal age and with residence at 23 Jump St.
Mabolo Cebu City, having been duly sworn, depose and say:
1. I am the Plaintiff;
2. I believe that the information contained in the affidavit is true; and
3. I request this Honorable Court to make the orders sought in the
notice of motion.
Juan Dela Cruz,

Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, by the above named affiant,

this December 13, 2018 who is personally known to me and to me know
personally to be the same person who signed this AFFIDAVIT IN
SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION in Cebu City, Philippines.
Doc. No. 347

Page No. 91
Book No: 65
Series of 2018
ERIKA JUDI LOMOCSO

Notary Public
IBP O.R.No. 12345/12-13-2018
PTR O.R.No. 34454545/12-3-2018
MCLE Compliance No.V-9234244512/2/2018/
Roll.no. 656452
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT

Branch 9
Cebu City
JUAN DELA CRUZ,

Plaintiff, Civil Case no.12344
-versus- For: Sum of money
PEDRO DEL ROSARIO

Defendant,
x--------------------------------------------------x
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel and to this Honorable Court respectfully
moves for leave to file an amended complaint, by alleging facts more
clearly and specifying the facts in a more methodical manner, upon
which certain conclusions are made. The amended complaint, showing
the amendments by underlining them or indicating by appropriate way
what have been deleted therefrom, is attached hereto as Annex “A”.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays that he be given leave of court to file
an amended complaint, which is attached herewith, and that same be
admitted.
Plaintiff prays for such other reliefs as may be just and equitable in
the premises.
IBP No. 1234512-13-2019
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2019
Roll.no. 656452
NOTICE OF HEARING
HON.CLERK OF COURT
BR.9
Greetings.

10, 2019, 8:30 AM.

IBP No. 1234512-13-2019
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2019
Roll.no. 656452
COPY FURNISHED:

IBP No. 1234512-13-2019
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2019
Roll.no. 656452
RECIEVED BY:
EXPLANATION
Copy of the MOTION was server by registered mail due to time and
the same in person.
ZEUS MORALES
MOTION FOR DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT

Branch 8
Cebu City
JUAN DELA CRUZ,

Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 1234
-versus- For: Sum of Money
PEDRO DEL ROSARIO,

Defendant.
x----------------------------------------------x
MOTION FOR DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF, by counsel and to this Honorable Court, respectfully
moves that he be allowed to dismiss his complaint, pursuant to Sec.2 of
Rule 17 of the Rules of Court, the dismissal being without prejudice.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays that he be allowed to dismiss his
complaint without prejudice.
Cebu City, February 23, 2019.

IBP No. 1234512-13-2019
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2019
Roll.no. 656452
NOTICE OF HEARING
HON.CLERK OF COURT
BR.9
Greetings.

10, 2019, 8:30 AM.

IBP No. 1234512-13-2019
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2019
Roll.no. 656452
COPY FURNISHED:

IBP No. 1234512-13-2019
PTR No. 3445454512-3-2019
Roll.no. 656452
RECIEVED BY:
EXPLANATION
Copy of the MOTION was server by registered mail due to time and
the same in person.
ZEUS MORALES
PRETRIAL BRIEF

7th Judicial Region
Branch 65
City of Naga, Cebu
NATALIA C. SANTOS,
Plaintiff,
-versus- Civil case no.__________

For Accion Reivindicatoria
Quieting of Title
With Prayer for Preliminary
Mandatory Injunction
JUAN RICARDO G. TORRES,
Defendant.
X-------------------------------------------------------x
PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully submits the Pre-Trial Brief, as

follows:
I. WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO AN AMICABLE
SETTLEMENT AND POSSIBLE TERMS OF ANY SUCH
SETTLEMENT
1.1 Subject to a concrete proposal that is fair and reasonable and a

reciprocal manifestation of openness from plaintiff, defendant is open to
the possiblity of amicably settling the dispute.
1.2 Pursuant to Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure,
defendant respectfully submits that the desired terms of any amicable
settlement would involve, first, a clarification of the real owner of a
parcel of land at a residential area in Barangay Pakigne, Minglanilla,
Cebu which is the subject of the action awaiting confirmation as to the
genuineness and authenticity of the Transfer of Title and Deed of
Absolute Sale presented by both parties.
II. ADMITTED FACTS
The allegations in paragraph 1 of the complaint as to the personal

circumstances of the plaintiff and paragraph 2
III. BRIEF STATEMENTS OF CLAIMS AND DEFENSES
A.The Plaintiff has NO CAUSE OF ACTION against the defendants as

evidenced by the following facts:
1. The Transfer Certificate of Title attached as “Annex -A” in the
complaint lacks genuineness and authenticity. It is just a certified true copy
and did not contain the succeeding 3 pages of the title; the original owner’s
duplicate copy is in the hands of the defendant. Hence, there was no
conveyance of legal title and ownership in the name of the plaintiff.
2. The lot is covered by the declaration of real property No. 20-0013-

17460 issued by the Minglanilla Assessor’s office on October 18, 2012, with
an assessed value of thrity seven thousand Five Hundred pesos (37,500.00);
certified Xerox copy from duplicate file is attached in the defendant’s
answer and made an integral part as “Annex- E”.
Rule 2 of the Rules of Court defines a cause of action as:

SEC.2 Cause of action, defined- A cause of action is the act or omission
by which a party violates the right of another.
Circumstances considered, there was no right that was violated on the
part of the plaintiff to speak of since the absolute and registered owner is the
defendant and not the plaintiff.
B. No cloud of title exists nor is there a need for a quieting of title that
affects the lot mentioned by the Plaintiff in the complaint.
In order that an action for quieting of title may prosper, two requisites
must concur: 1.) the plaintiff or complainant has a legal or equitable title or
interest in the real property subject of the action; and, (2) the deed, claim,
encumbrance, or proceeding claimed to be casting cloud on his title must be
shown to be in fact invalid or inoperative despite its prima facie appearance
of validity or legal efficacy.
Defendant most respectfully submits that the complaint hardly qualifies

for a quieting of title because the plaintiff has not established equitable or
legal title to the parcel of land in question.
IV. PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS
As provided under Rule 26 of the Rule on Civil Procedure, defendant

requests plaintiff to admit the genuiness and due execution of the following
documents within 15 days after service thereof, otherwise each of the
following documents presented by the defendant shall be deemed admitted:
1. Transfer Certificate of Title No._______
2. Tax Declaration No. 20-0013-7460
V. PROPOSED ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
Whether or not plaintiff has the legal or equitable title to the parcel of
land in question
Whether or not plaintiff has a cause of action for the defendant
VI. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
Defendant intends to present 1 or 2 witnesses to prove that he indeed

purchased the land in question from Gary Pogador as evidenced by the
Absolute Deed of Sale indicating the name of the defendant as the buyer.
VII. AVAILMENT OF MODES OF DISCOVERY
The defendant reserves the right to avail the modes of discovery in

addition to the aforementioned request for stipulation.
VIII . APPLICABLE LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE
The defendants grounds its answer on the provision of the New Civil
Code and 1997 Rules of Procedure.
IX. RESERVATION
The defendant respectfully reserves the right to present additional and

documentary evidence as may become necessary in the course of the trial.
X. SPECIFIC TRIAL DATES
It is respectfully requested that the trial dates be set during the pre-trial
conference to dates most convenient to this Honorable Court and to all the
parties.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
City Naga, Cebu, January 26, 2019.
A&A LAW OFFICES

Counsels for the Defendant
Ramos St. Cebu City
262-6612
A&A lawfirm@gmail.com
By:
AIA MARIE COMEDIDO
IBP O.R. NO.3454/12-30-2018/CEBU CITY
PTR O.R.NO.12345/12-30-2018/CEBU CITY
MCLE COMPLIANCE NO.111-12345/December 1,2018
ROLL NO:4565
Copy furnished through personal service:
Atty.Rachel E. Bonita
Counsels for the Plaintiff
Suite 205, Silver Tower Bldg.,
Lahug,Cebu City
Republic of the Philippines}
Province of Cebu } S. S
AFFIDAVIT OF PROOF OF SERVICE
I, PRIMITIVO SANTOS, of legal age, and resident

of 22 Rizal Street, Tisa, Cebu City. After being
sworn in accordance with law depose and say:
1. That I am the messenger of Atty.Aia Marie

M. Comedido;
2. That I on December 15,2018 personally

delivered Defendant’s pre-trial brief to
Plaintiff NATALIA C. SANTOS with address
Barangay Pakigne, Minglanilla, Cebu and
Atty.Rachel E. Bonita plaintiff’s counsel
at her office Suite 205, Silver Tower
Bldg.,Lahug,Cebu City;
3. The Pre-trial Brief was received by

plaintiff herself and her counsel.
PRIMITIVO SANTOS
Affiant
SSS ID NO: 06-1234567-03
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, by the above

named affiant, this December 13, 2018 who is
personally known to me and to me know personally
to be the same person who signed this
SHOPPING in Province of Naga, Cebu, Philippines.
Doc. No. 376

Page No. 91
Book No: 65
Series of 2018
ERIKA JUDI LOMOCSO

Notary Public
IBP O.R.No. 12345/ 12-13-2018
PTR O.R.No. 34454545/12-3-2018
MCLE Compliance No.V-92342445, December 4,2018
Roll.no. 656452

Form 30 40

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Form 30 40

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

NOTICE OF DEATH OF PARTY

Republic of the Philippines

-versus- Civil Case No.32

NOTICE OF DEATH OF PARTY

The heirs or representatives of said deceased are the following:

1. TRU DELA CRUZ resident of Purok 1, Mamburao Occ.

Mamburao, Occ. Mindoro, February 20,2019.

RICA KAYE O. LOMIBAO

I, Speedy Gonzales, messenger of Atty. Rica Kaye Lomibao,

Republic of the Philippines

Plaintiff, Civil Case No.423

Jose Del Rosario,

PLAINTIFF, Delfin Padilla, by undersigned counsel and to

1. Plaintiff is of legal age, married, and with residence at Real

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

WHEREFORE, all premises considered, plaintiff respectfully prays

a. Under the First Cause of Action, ordering defendant to

Manila, Janary 15, 2005

RICA KAYE O. LOMIBAO

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM

I, DELFIN PADILAA, Filipino, single, legal age and is

1. I am the plaintiff in the above-entitled case;

Passport No.P61197641 Valid until February 20,2005

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, by the above named

Doc. No. 346

RICA KAYE O. LOMIBAO

Republic of the Philippines

Civil Case No.___________

For Accion Reivindicatoria,

Quieting of Title and Damages

With Prayer for Preliminary

JUAN RICARDO G. TORRES,

ADMISSIONS AND DENIALS

1. The allegations in paragraph 1 of the complaint as to the personal

4. Paragraph 3.2 as regards to the Deed of Absolute Sale attached as

Paragraph 3.3 is denied for lack of information or knowledge

Paragraph 3.4 with regard to the Tax Declaration marked as Annex D

5. Paragraph 4 is denied for lack of information or knowledge sufficient

6. Paragraph 5 is denied as to the allegation that defendant intruded in

7. Paragraph 6 is denied, defendant did not receive any verbal demand

8. The allegation of the plaintiff in paragraph 7 is likewise denied.

9. Paragraph 8 is denied for lack of information or knowledge sufficient

10.The allegation on Paragraph 8.1 as to the alleged statement of the

12.Save for the legal provisions quoted in paragraph 9,9.1,9.2,9.3, the

15.The allegations in paragraph 15,16,17,18 are denied as the same is an

16.The foregoing are subject to the special and affirmative defenses

SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

17.The Plaintiff has NO CAUSE OF ACTION against the

Sec.2.Cause of action, defined- A cause of action is the

The essential elements of a cause of action are (1) a right

The Defendant is the absolute and registered owner of the Seventy-Six

The lot is covered by Tax Declaration of Real Property No. 20-0013-

Defendant most respectfully submits that the Complaint hardly

1. Due to the plaintiff’s willful and patent disregard of the

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most

1. The Special and Affirmative shall be immediately set for

City Naga, Cebu, December 15,2018.

AIA MARIE COMEDIDO

I, JUAN RICARDO G. TORRES, Filipino, single, legal age and is

6. I am the defendant in the above-entitled case;

JUAN RICARDO TORRES

Passport No.P61197641 Valid until February 20,2028