REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

National Capital Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 44

JACK LAM,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 242302-2

For: Sum of Money

RODRIGO ROA AND RICHARD ROA,

Defendant.
x-----------------------------------------------------x

THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT

Defendant by the undersigned attorney and with leave

of court with leave of court, filed this third party complaint
against JUAN DELA CRUZ hereinafter called the third party
defendant, and respectfully avers:

1. That the defendant and the third party defendant

are both of age and residents of 123 Sampaloc St., Makati
City;

2. That on or about March 2, 2015, a complaint was

filed by JACK LAM against RODRIGO ROA, a copy of which is
hereto attached as ANNEX A;

3. That the third party in the purchase of the subject

vehicle from the plaintiff, payment for which is the subject of
the said complaint acted for and in behalf, and as agent of the
third party defendant;

4. That after the purchase of the said motor vehicle

aforementioned, third party plaintiff immediately delivered
the same to the third party defendant who promised to pay
the full purchase price to the plaintiff.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most

respectfully prayed unto this Honorable Court that, after
hearing, judgment be rendered as follows:
 1. Ordering the third-party defendant to indemnify the
third-party plaintiff for whatever is adjudged against the latter
the latter in favor of the said original plaintiff.

Such other relief and remedies as may be deemed just

and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.

Manila for Pasig City, February 22, 2013.

EVANGELISTA AND
ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICE
Counsel for the plaintiff
Unit 555 Trump Tower, 1750
Ayala Ave, Makati City

By:

JASON B. EVANGELISTA
IBP No. 12345/1-5-17
PTR No. 2234234/1-6-17
Roll No. 54545
MCLE no. 5252, May 6, 2016
Tel No. 740-4005

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST

FORUM SHOPPING

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

CITY OF MANILA ) S.S

I, Jack Lam, of legal age, Filipino Citizen, married, after

having been duly sworn to in accordance with law do hereby
depose and say:

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

2. That I have caused the preparation of the foregoing

Complaint and have ready the allegations contained therein;

3. The allegations in the said complaint are true and

correct of my own knowledge and authentic records;

4. I hereby certify that I have not commenced any

other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the
Supreme Court, or Court of Appeals or any other tribunal or
agency;

5. That if I should thereafter learned that a similar

action or proceedings has been filed or is pending before the
Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or
agency, I hereby undertake to report that fact within five (5)
days therefrom to the court or agency wherein the original
pleading and sworn certification contemplated herein have
been filed;

6. I executed this verification/certification to attest to

the truth of the foregoing facts and to comply with the
provisions of Adm. Circular No. 04-94 of the Honorable
Supreme Court.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my

signature this 5th day of May 2016, in the City of Makati.

RICHARD DELA ROSA

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 5th day

of May 2016 in the City of Makati, affiant exhibiting to me his
Drivers Licence I.D No. 123456 issued at Santiago City,
Isabela on June 10, 2013.

Doc. No. (SGD)Atty. Ryan Hernandez

Page No. Notary Public
Book No. Until December 2018
Series of 2016 PTR. No. 2382932 / 2016 / QC
IBP No. 12345/ 2015/ QC
ROLL No. 54321/ Tin 123-456
MCLE 111-43232
Com. No. 2015-232
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 44

JACK JILL,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 242302-2

For: Action for Recovery of
land with Damages

PETER NG,
Defendant.
x-----------------------------------------------------x

NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS

TO: The Register of Deeds

City of Manila

Sir:
Please register a notice of lis pendens of Civil Case No.
22342 on TCT No. 23324 of the Registry of Deeds for City
Province of Antipolo, covering a parcel of land which is
involved in the above-entitled case now pending before the
Regional Trial Court of Manila. Copy of the Complaint is
hereto attached as part and parcel of this Notice of Lis
Pendens.
The land involved in the above entitled case is covered
by TCT No. 34343 is described in said title as follows:

A parcel of land described on plan psu-

3232 and LRC Rec. No. 16019, situated
in the Municipality of Maasin, Southern
Leyte. Bounded on the NE, pts. 3 to 4 by
Road Lot 3, on the SE, pts 4 to 1 by Lot
19m on the SW, pts 1 to 2 by lot 18, and
on the NW, pts 2 to 3 by Lot 15, all of the
subdivision plan xx xxx containing an
area of TWO HUNDRED (216) SQUARE
METERS, more or less..
 May we therefore your Honorable Office to make the
proper annotation of the above notice of lis pendens at the
back of said title.

Manila, January 9, 2015.

EVANGELISTA
EVANGELISTA AND
ASSOCIATES
Counsel for the plaintiff
Suit 232 Century Park Bldg,
Ortigas Ave, Pasig

By:

EDMON EVANGELISTA
IBP No. 12345/1-5-17
PTR No. 2234234/1-6-17
Roll No. 54545
MCLE no. 5252, May 6, 2016
Tel No. 740-4005

CC: ATTY. RAMON ANG

Counsel for the Defendant
123 Magsalin St., Sampaloc, Manila

EXPLANATION OF SERVICE

Copy of the Notice of Lis Pendens was served to the

defendant by registered mail due to time and distance
constraints, and for lack of the undersigneds staff who can
serve the same in person.

EDMON EVANGELISTA
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 44

JACK JILL,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 242302-2

For: Sum of Money

PETER NG,
Defendant.
x-----------------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION

INTERVENOR in the above-entitle case, thru counsel,

and with leave of court previously obtained, respectfully filed
this complaint intervention, and alleges:

1. That the intervenor is of age, single, and a

resident of 123 V.Mapa St., Sampaloc, Manila;

2. That he reproduces and makes his own allegations

contained in paragraphs 2, 4 and 6 of plaintiffs complaint;

3. That the sale of the car between the plaintiff and

defendant is void ab ignitio as the defendant is not the
absolute owner of the property as evidenced by the
Registration of Title as Annex B.

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the

judgment be entered:

1. Ordering the defendant to indemnify the intervenor

for whatever is adjudged against the latter in favor of the said
original plaintiff.

Manila, February 14, 2014.

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST

FORUM SHOPPING
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
CITY OF MANILA ) S.S

I, Jack Lam, of legal age, Filipino Citizen, married, after

having been duly sworn to in accordance with law do hereby
depose and say:

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

2. That I have caused the preparation of the foregoing

Complaint and have ready the allegations contained therein;

3. The allegations in the said complaint are true and

correct of my own knowledge and authentic records;

4. I hereby certify that I have not commenced any

other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the
Supreme Court, or Court of Appeals or any other tribunal or
agency;

5. That if I should thereafter learned that a similar

action or proceedings has been filed or is pending before the
Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or
agency, I hereby undertake to report that fact within five (5)
days therefrom to the court or agency wherein the original
pleading and sworn certification contemplated herein have
been filed;

6. I executed this verification/certification to attest to

the truth of the foregoing facts and to comply with the
provisions of Adm. Circular No. 04-94 of the Honorable
Supreme Court.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my

signature this 5th day of May 2016, in the City of Makati.

RICHARD DELA ROSA

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 5th day

of May 2016 in the City of Makati, affiant exhibiting to me his
Drivers Licence I.D No. 123456 issued at Santiago City,
Isabela on June 10, 2013.

Doc. No. (SGD)Atty. Ryan Hernandez

Page No. Notary Public
Book No. Until December 2018
Series of 2016 PTR. No. 2382932 / 2016 / QC
IBP No. 12345/ 2015/ QC
ROLL No. 54321/ Tin 123-456
MCLE 111-43232
Com. No. 2015-232
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 44

JACK JILL,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 242302-2

For: Action for Recovery of
land with Damages

PETER NG,
Defendant.
x-----------------------------------------------------x

MOTION TO DISMISS

DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully moves to dismiss

the Complaint on the ground that the Complaint FAILS TO
STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION as the OBLIGATION SOUGHT
TO BE ENFORCED BY PLAINTIFF IS NOT YET DUE AND
DEMANDABLE.

In amplication of the foregoing ground, Defendant

respectfully submits the following:

Argument

1. Allegedly, defendant has failed to reach the quotas

agreed upon under the Marketing Agreement dated April 1,
2006. Plaintiff now seeks to collect the sum of Five Hundred
Thousand pesos (P5000,000.00), representing the balance of
the proceeds due plaintiff under the said Marketing
Agreement.

2. The contract is for (2) years and defendant is given

that same period to reach the quota specified therein, the
period of two (2) has not yet expired. Consequently,
plaintiffs claim is premature as there is yet no breach of the
Marketing Agreement until the period expires and the quota
is not attained. For this reason, plaintiffs Complaint states
no cause of action and must be dismissed.
 WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully pray that the
Complaint be DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.

Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.

Manila for Las Pinas City, November 22, 2007.

Demetrio Sandoval
Counsel for Defendant
4th floor, Madrigal Tower,
Madrigal Business Center,
Alabang, Muntinlupa City
Attorneys Roll No. 2324
IBP 2324-01/03/08 Muntilupa
PTR 4232-01/03/08 Muntilupa
MCLE No. 23242-Nov. 17,
2007

REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING

The Branch Clerk of Court

Regional Trial Court
Branch 24, Las Pinas City

Please submit the foregoing Motion to the Court for its

consideration and approval immediately upon receipt hereof
and kindly include the same in the courts calendar for hearing
on November 29, 2007 at 8:30 in the morning.

Demetrio Sandoval
Counsel for Defendant

Atty. Conrado Manuel

Counsel for Plaintiff
2176 Alabang-Zapote Road,
Las Pinas City

Please take notice that counsel has requested to be

heard on November 28, 2007 at 8:30 in the morning.

Demetrio Sandoval
Counsel for Defendant

EXPLANATION OF SERVICE

Copy of the Notice of Lis Pendens was served to the

defendant by registered mail due to time and distance
constraints, and for lack of the undersigneds staff who can
serve the same in person.

Demetrio Sandoval

CC: Atty. Conrado Manuel

Counsel for Plaintiff
2176 Alabang-Zapote Road,
Las Pinas City
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 44

KATHRYN BERNARDO,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 242302-2

For: Sum of Money

ANGELINA JOLIE,
Defendant.
x-----------------------------------------------------x

PRE-TRIAL BRIEF

Defendant, through counsel, respectfully submits her

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 possibility of amicable
setting this 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 actual extent of any obligation due and owing
to plaintiff inasmuch as there is nothing to indicate
defendants obligations to plaintiff and, second, a schedule of
payments.

II. BRIEF STATEMENT OF CLAIMS AND

DEFENSES

1.1 Plaintiff seeks principally to recover the amount of

One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) with interest at twelve
percent (12%) arising allegedly from unpaid orders delivered
to defendant.
 1.2 Defendant resists plaintiffs claims based on a failure
to state a cause of action because:

2.2.1 Plaintiffs lack of personality to sue and,

therefore, not being the real party in interest under Rule 3,
Section 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure;

2.2.2 Extinguishment of the alleged claim

made by the defendant on May 28, 2007.

2.3 Defendant also interposed a compulsory

counterclaim for Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) for moral
damages and Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P200,000.00) as
attorneys fees.

III. FACTS AND OTHER MATTERS ADMITTED BY

THE PARTIES

3.1 Defendant admits only those facts stated in his

Answer, ie., her personal circumstances, receipt of the
demand letter dated January 10, 2007 and her reply to the
demand letter.

3.2 Subject to a concrete proposal for stipulation of

additional facts from plaintiff during pre-trial or even
thereafter, defendant admits no other facts stated in the
Complaint.

IV. ISSUED TO BE TRIED

4.1 Defendant submits that the following issues put

forward by plaintiff are subject to proof:

4.1.1 Plaintiffs personality to seek legal relief;

4.1.2 Plaintiffs entitlement to the amount

claimed;

4.2 Defendant submits that the following issues she put

forward are subject to proof:

4.2.1 Plaintiffs bad faith in filing this suit;

4.2.2 Defendants entitlement to the claims

made in her Compulsory Counterclaim as a result of plaintiffs
bad faith

V. EVIDENCE
 5.1 Defendant intends to present the following
witnesses:

5.1.1 Defendant herself who will testify on the

circumstances leading to the filing of this suit against her;

5.1.2 An employee of defendant with personal

knowledge as to the true circumstances behind the alleged
obligations due and owing in favor of plaintiff.

5.2 Defendant reserves the right to present any and all

documentary evidence which shall become relevant to rebut
plaintiffs claim in the course of trial as well as any other
witnesses whose testimony will become relevant to belie
plaintiffs witnesses, if necessary.

VI. RESORT TO DISCOVERY

6.1 Considering the relatively simple issues presented,

defendant does not intent to avail of discovery at this time.

6.2 Subject, however, to a concrete and reasonable

request for discovery from plaintiff, defendant reserves the
right to resort to discovery before trial.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this 8th day of August 2007,

Pasig City.

JASON B. EVANGELISTA
Counsel for Defendant
89 Mindanao Ave, Quezon City
Attorneys Roll No. 12354
IBP No. 2323/ 01/15/08/ QC
PTR No. 3343/ 01/15/08/ QC
MCLE No. 3434/ January 8, 2008

NOTICE OF HEARING

The Branch Clerk of Court

Regional Trial Court
Branch 24, Las Pinas City

Please submit the foregoing Motion to the Court for its

consideration and approval immediately upon receipt hereof
and kindly include the same in the courts calendar for hearing
on November 29, 2007 at 8:30 in the morning.
 Jason B. Evangelista
Counsel for Defendant

Atty. Conrado Manuel

Counsel for Plaintiff
2176 Alabang-Zapote Road,
Las Pinas City

Please take notice that counsel has requested to be

heard on November 28, 2007 at 8:30 in the morning.

Jason B. Evangelista
Counsel for Defendant

EXPLANATION OF SERVICE

Copy of the Notice of Lis Pendens was served to the

defendant by registered mail due to time and distance
constraints, and for lack of the undersigneds staff who can
serve the same in person.

Jason B. Evangelista

CC: Atty. Conrado Manuel

Counsel for Plaintiff
2176 Alabang-Zapote Road,
Las Pinas City
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 44

BENJAMIN PENAFLOR,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 242302-2

For: Sum of Money

ANGEL MEDINA,
Defendant.
x-----------------------------------------------------x

ANSWER
(with COUNTERCLAIM)

DEFENDANT, through counsel, by way of answer to

plaintiffs complaint, respectfully states that:

Admissions/Denials

1. He admits the allegation in paragraph 2 of the

Complaint regarding his personal circumstances;

2. He is without knowledge or information to form a

belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraphs 1, 4, 5
and 6 of the complaint;

3. He specifically denies each and every material

allegation in paragraph 3 of the Complaint, since such
allegations are maliciously false and meant only to unjustly
enrich Plaintiff at Defendants expense. The truth is the
principal obligation amounts to only Six Hundred Thousand
Pesos (P600,000.00) but due to unconscionable interests,
excessive penalties and other charges, Defendant was
deceived into signing a receipt that showed, as Defendant
much later on learned, the aggregate amount of indebtedness
to be Nine Hundred Thousand Pesos (P900,000.00), inclusive
of the unconscionable interests, excessive penalties, and
other charges;

Special and Affirmative Defenses

 4. The Complaint does not state a cause of action and
is a sham pleading;

4.1 On or about June 28, 2005, Defendants incurred

indebtedness of Three Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P350,000.00) with Plaintiff;

4.2 Due to a close and long relationship with Plaintiff,

Defendant was deceived into signing a receipt which he
thought contained only a reasonable rate of interest per
Defendants oral agreement with Plaintiff;

4.3 Upon securing a copy of the receipt much later,

Defendant discovered to his utter surprise that the rate of
interest indicated on the receipt is five (5%) percent per
month, or sixty (60%) percent per annum.

4.4 Defendants were perplexed that their indebtedness

continued to increase despite the fact that they had already
paid the following amounts: P150,000.00 on July 12, 2005
and P250,000.00 on September 8, 2008 more that the
principal obligation of P350,000.00 (Photocopies of payment
receipts are hereto attached as Annexes A to A-9 and are
made an integral party of this Answer.)

Counterclaim

5. Defendant Additionally submits that he is entitled

to relief arising from the filing of this malicious and baseless
suit as follows:

5.1 Moral damages amounting to Fifty Thousand Pesos

(P50,000.00) because his name and reputation were
besmirched by this malicious and baseless suit;

5.2 Despite full payment by Defendant of the principal

obligation, Plaintiff has instituted the instant malicious suit
which compelled Defendant to engage the services of counsel,
in order to protect Defendants interests for an agreed
professional fee of P200,000.00, plus an appearance fee of
P5,000.00 per hearing.

5.3 Defendants also incurred other litigation expenses

in the sum of P50,000.00. For all the said fees and litigation
expenses, Plaintiff should be adjudged liable to Defendant.

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully prays that the

judgment be rendered in his favor by dismissing the
Complaint and grating defendants counterclaim by awarding
defendant a) Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) as moral
damages, and b) Two Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P200,000.00) plus Five Thousand Pesos (P5,000.00) for
every hearing attended by Defendants counsel as Attorneys
fees.

Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.

Quezon City for Muntinlupa City, October 11, 2007.

JASON B. EVANGELISTA
Counsel for Defendant
89 Mindanao Ave, Quezon City
Attorneys Roll No. 12354
IBP No. 2323/ 01/15/08/ QC
PTR No. 3343/ 01/15/08/ QC
MCLE No. 3434/ January 8, 2008

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST

FORUM SHOPPING

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

CITY OF MANILA ) S.S

I, Jack Lam, of legal age, Filipino Citizen, married, after

having been duly sworn to in accordance with law do hereby
depose and say:

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

2. That I have caused the preparation of the foregoing

Complaint and have ready the allegations contained therein;

3. The allegations in the said complaint are true and

correct of my own knowledge and authentic records;

4. I hereby certify that I have not commenced any

other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the
Supreme Court, or Court of Appeals or any other tribunal or
agency;

5. That if I should thereafter learned that a similar

action or proceedings has been filed or is pending before the
Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or
agency, I hereby undertake to report that fact within five (5)
days therefrom to the court or agency wherein the original
pleading and sworn certification contemplated herein have
been filed;

6. I executed this verification/certification to attest to

the truth of the foregoing facts and to comply with the
provisions of Adm. Circular No. 04-94 of the Honorable
Supreme Court.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my

signature this 5th day of May 2016, in the City of Makati.

RICHARD DELA ROSA

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 5th day

of May 2016 in the City of Makati, affiant exhibiting to me his
Drivers Licence I.D No. 123456 issued at Santiago City,
Isabela on June 10, 2013.

Doc. No. (SGD)Atty. Ryan Hernandez

Page No. Notary Public
Book No. Until December 2018
Series of 2016 PTR. No. 2382932 / 2016 / QC
IBP No. 12345/ 2015/ QC
ROLL No. 54321/ Tin 123-456
MCLE 111-43232
Com. No. 2015-232

Copy Furnished through personal Service:

Atty. Glenn Pascua

Counsel for Plaintiff
5th floor, Madrigal Business Tower,
Madrigal Business Center,
Alabang, Muntinlupa City

PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Primitivo Santos, messenger for Atty. Jason B.

Evangelista, herein counsel for defendant Brandon Vera,
hereby certify that I personally delivered Defendants answer
dated October 11, 2007 to plaintiff Thomas Cruz with address
at No. 223 Pacific Avenue, Pacific Village, Alabang, Muntinlupa
City. The Answer was received by plaintiff himself.
 PRIMITIVO SANTOS

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 5th day

of May 2016 in the City of Makati, affiant exhibiting to me his
Drivers Licence I.D No. 123456 issued at Santiago City,
Isabela on June 10, 2013.

Doc. No. (SGD)Atty. Ryan Hernandez

Page No. Notary Public
Book No. Until December 2018
Series of 2016 PTR. No. 2382932 / 2016 / QC
IBP No. 12345/ 2015/ QC
ROLL No. 54321/ Tin 123-456
MCLE 111-43232
Com. No. 2015-232

Copy furnished through registered mail:

Atty. Glenn Pascua

Counsel for Plaintiff
5th floor, Madrigal Business Tower,
Madrigal Business Center,
Alabang, Muntinlupa City

EXPLANATION
(Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13, 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure)

A copy of the foregoing Answer was served on Plaintiffs

counsel by registered mail due to time constraints and lack of
messenger to effect personal service.

Atty. Jason B. Evangelista

Counsel for Defendant
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 44

KATHRYN BERNARDO,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 242302-2

For: Sum of Money

ANGELINA JOLIE,
Defendant.
x-----------------------------------------------------x

MOTION FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS

Defendant, through counsel and unto this Honorable

Court respectfully avers that:

1. That the plaintiffs complaint in paragraph 5

alleges: From August 3 to December 2003, defendant
never paid anything to herein plaintiff. The check that he
issued as partial payment for the first month also bounced. x
x x (underscoring supplied);

2. The said allegation is not averred with sufficient

definiteness and particularity, specifically it does not
mention the amount of the check therein mentioned, its
check number, date and the drawee bank;

3. That a more definite statement on the matters as

above-indicated is necessary in order to enable the
defendant to prepare its responsive pleading because from
the very onset of this controversy, the main dispute was on
the was actually and exactly agreed upon by the parties as
the amount of monthly rentals on the lease of plaintiffs
property;

4. However, due to the fact that the defendant

corporation had to transfer its liaison offices depending on
its projects sites, the check stub where the above-mentioned
check came from was probably misplaced and could no
longer be found;
 5. That a bill of particulars or a more definite
statement as to particulars of the check which was allegedly
issued by the defendants as partial payment for the first
month would definitely simply the issues in this case, and
hopefully uncomplicated the negotiations between the
parties for an amicable settlement.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, defendant most respectfully prays that

an order be issued by this Honorable Court requiring the
plaintiff to make more definite statement as to particulars of
the check mentioned in paragraph 5 of his complaint,
particularly stating its amount, check number, date, and the
name of the drawee bank.

Manila, Philippines. January 5, 2006.

JASON B. EVANGELISTA
Counsel for Defendant
89 Mindanao Ave, Quezon City
Attorneys Roll No. 12354
IBP No. 2323/ 01/15/08/ QC
PTR No. 3343/ 01/15/08/ QC
MCLE No. 3434/ January 8, 2008

Copy furnished through registered mail:

Atty. Glenn Pascua

Counsel for Plaintiff
5th floor, Madrigal Business Tower,
Madrigal Business Center,
Alabang, Muntinlupa City

EXPLANATION
(Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13, 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure)

A copy of the foregoing Answer was served on Plaintiffs

counsel by registered mail due to time constraints and lack of
messenger to effect personal service.

Atty. Jason B. Evangelista

Counsel for Defendant
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
CITY OF MANILA
CITY COUNCIL

COMMITTEE ON BARANGAY AFFAIRS

JASON EVANGELISTA,
Complainant,

- versus - COBA CASE NO-

______________
For: Grave Misconduct

KAGAWAD EDGARDO DELA CRUZ.

Respondent.
x----------------------------x

MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL

OF COMPLAINT

I, JASON B. EVANGELISTA, of legal age, to this

Honorable Office, hereby depose and state that:

1. I am the complainant in the above-captioned case

against KAGAWAD EDGARDO DUE, Barangay Kagawad of
Barangay 37, Zone 3, District I, Tondo, Manila.

2. At the outset, the complainant hereby manifests its

highest respect and belief in the competence and integrity of
the Honorable Office.

3. However, with all due respect, I am respectfully

moving for the withdrawal of my complaint, not due to lack
interest to prosecute thereof, but because I feel that another
forum may be proper to ventilate the issues I have raised
against herein respondent

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing considerations, it is

respectfully prayed that the Honorable Committee to allow the
withdrawal of the instant complaint.
 Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.
City of Manila. February 5, 2014

JASON EVANGELISTA

Copy furnished:

KAGAWAD EDGARDO DUE, Barangay Kagawad of Barangay

37, Zone 3, District I, Tondo, Manila

VERIFICATION

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)

City of Manila )S.S

I, JASON B. EVANGELISTA of legal age, hereby depose and

state:

That I caused the preparation of the foregoing Motion to

withdraw complaint, which I have read and fully understood,
and the allegations therein are true and correct based on our
personal knowledge and/or authentic records.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto affixed my

signatures this ___ day of February, in the City of Manila.

JASON EVANGELISTA
 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ___ day
of February 2014 in the City of Manila, exhibiting to me the
following as their competent evidence of identity:

ID No. Date of Issue Expiry

SHERWIN C. TOLETE

Doc. No.______;
Page. No.______;
Book No._______;
Series of 2014.
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
7th JUDICIAL REGION
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 123
CEBU CITY

JUAN DE LA CRUZ
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 12323

FOR: SUM OF MONEY

JUAN TAMAD
Defendant.
x---------------------------------------x

MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT

Plaintiff, by counsel and unto this Honorable Court,

respectfully states

1. The records of the Honorable Court show that Defendant

was served with copy of the summons and of the complaint,
together with annexes thereto on 15 January 2015.

2. Upon verification however, the records show that

Defendant Juan Tamad has failed to file his Answer within the
reglementary period specified by the Rules of Court despite
the service of the summons and the complaint;

3. As such, it is respectfully prayed that Defendant Juan

Tamad be declared in default pursuant to the Rules of Court
and that the Honorable Court proceed to render judgment as
the complaint may warrant.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that Defendant

JUAN TAMAD be declared in default pursuant to the Rules of
Court and that the Honorable Court proceed to render
judgment as the complaint may warrant.

Other reliefs, just and equitable under the given

circumstances, are likewise prayed for.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
16 FEBRUARY 2015
Las Pinas City, PHILIPPINES.
 Demetrio Sandoval
Counsel for Defendant
4th floor, Madrigal Tower,
Madrigal Business Center,
Alabang, Muntinlupa City
Attorneys Roll No. 2324
IBP 2324-01/03/08 Muntilupa
PTR 4232-01/03/08 Muntilupa
MCLE No. 23242-Nov. 17,
2007

REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING

The Branch Clerk of Court

Regional Trial Court
Branch 24, Las Pinas City

Please submit the foregoing Motion to the Court for its

consideration and approval immediately upon receipt hereof
and kindly include the same in the courts calendar for hearing
on November 29, 2007 at 8:30 in the morning.

Demetrio Sandoval
Counsel for Defendant

Atty. Conrado Manuel

Counsel for Plaintiff
2176 Alabang-Zapote Road,
Las Pinas City

Please take notice that counsel has requested to be

heard on November 28, 2007 at 8:30 in the morning.

Demetrio Sandoval
Counsel for Defendant

CC: Atty. Conrado Manuel

Counsel for Plaintiff
2176 Alabang-Zapote Road,
Las Pinas City
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
11TH Judicial Region, Branch 41
Municipality of Cantilan, Surigao del Sur

NIDA GASIS ULVIDA

Plaintiff,

---versus--- Civil Case No. 42323

For : Damages
WILSON SULLANO, ET ALS.
Defendants
x--------------------------------------x

MOTION TO LIFT/VACATE ORDER OF DEFAULT AND

ADMIT ATTACHED ANSWER

Defendants, through the undersigned Public

Attorney and to this Honorable Court, after having been
duly deposed and having been placed under oath, hereby say:

1. That at the outset of this case, Defendants Answer

caused the dismissal of Plaintiffs case, without objection
from defendants and counsel, giving plaintiff a chance to
re-file the same;

2. When Plaintiff re-filed anew a Complaint, Defendants

wasted no time in going to the Public Attorneys Office to
inform their lawyer that a case has been refiled against
them. Unfortunately, their lawyer was already re-
assigned to another PAO District Office and it was herein
undersigned lawyers first day at work;

3. Faced with a challenge that could aptly be characterized

as baptism by fire, the new PAO lawyers first day is a
hearing day much to his surprise. He took defendants
Summons and assured them that a new Answer shall be
filed in their behalf;

4. Much to their chagrin, their new lawyer erred in placing

their Summons and a copy of the new Complaint, inside
the old case folder, which was already labelled
DISMISSED as it was in fact, just dismissed. This was
the start of their misery, for as observed by plaintiffs
counsel -----and as admitted by the undersigned
 neophyte lawyer---- they were jolted awake by plaintiffs
filing of a Motion to Declare Defendant in Default;

5. To protect defendants rights, public counsel

immediately submitted a Motion to Admit Belatedly Filed
Answer, with explanation as to how this unfortunate
delay happened;

6. The Honorable Court, through the then Acting Presiding

Judge Rufo U. Naragas, declared Defendants in Default.
On June ___ hearing, Plaintiffs asked to present their
evidence ex parte considering the Default order against
defendants. Said ex parte presentation did not
materialize as defendants asked that they be given a
chance to file a Motion to Lift/Vacate Order of Default, a
remedy still available to them under Sec. 3 Rule 9 of the
Rules of Court;

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most

respectfully prayed to this Honorable Court that this
Manifestation be given due course and this case be ordered
finally DISMISSED.

Further, for the benefit of the private complainant, we

pray that a Permanent Protection Order be issued in favor of
Rita Solejon Granaderos.

Such other relief and remedies, consistent with law and

equity are likewise prayed for.

SUBMITTED, this 16th day of June 2016 in the City of

Tandag, Surigao del Sur.

Rita Granaderos Genilo Granaderos

With Conformity:

Pros. Benjamin P. Uy Atty. Jo Edward F.

Yecyec
Handling State Prosecutor Public Attorney I
Counsel for the State Counsel for Accused
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch 1

JOHN DOE,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE No. 23456

FOR: Recovery of Possession
AMIR KHAN, with Damages
Defendant.

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

MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT

TO SERVE SUMMONS BY PUBLICATION

COMES NOW, the plaintiff, through the undersigned

counsel and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully
avers:

1. That on August 25, 2012, copy of the summons was served

by the process server of this Honorable Court to the defendant
on his given address, but defendant is no longer residing on
his given address;

2. That considering that the whereabouts of the defendant is

unknown and this case affects the property of the defendant,
plaintiff most respectfully move with leave of court to serve
summons by publication.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays that the summons be

served by publication based on the above reasons.

Such other relief and remedies as may be deemed just

and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.

City of Manila, August 29, 2012.

ARUM AND
SYQUIA LAW OFFICE

Counsel for the Plaintiff

Unit 314 The Tower

T
aft Avenue, Manila
 By:

BOB ARUM

Roll No. 45678

IBP
No. 23456/1-3-12/Manila
PTR
No. 87654/1-3-12/Manila

NOTICE OF HEARING

AMIR KHAN
Defendant

GREETINGS:

Please submit the foregoing motion for the

consideration and approval of the Honorable Court on
September 9, 2012 at 2:00 PM.

BOB ARUM

Copy furnished:
AMIR KHAN
345 Nakpil Street
Manila

EXPLANATION

Copy of the Motion to Serve Summons by Publication

was served to defendant by registered mail due to time and
distance constraints, and for lack of the undersigneds staff
who can serve the same in person.

BOB ARUM
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Labor and Employment
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
Manila

RICARDO MAYORGA,
Complainant,

-versus- NLRC NCR CASE NO. 00-42423-55

COMPANY B,
Respondent.

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

COMPLAINANTS REPLY
POSITION PAPER

Complainant by counsel, to the Honorable Labor

Arbiter, respectfully states as follows:

1. In his position paper, Respondent Company B has

mentioned the duties and responsibilities of
Complainant A, which it is notable that it doesnt include
remittance of SSS, PAGIBIG and PHILHEALTH and
deduction of which to the employees. Such duty is bound
by the HR Department which A doesnt head.
2. Moreover, the contention of Company B on As
misrepresentation of the Audited Financial Statements
from 2010 to 2012 in fact brought them huge income.
Their 2013 audit showing loss and as their evidence
against A, was only released after A was illegally
dismissed.
3. Thus, it could be constituted that the 2013 audit as
evidence shows a violation of fair play by Company B.
4. Likewise, the C Corporation organized by A was made
with the consent of the Chairman of the Board of
Directors. Nonetheless, the oversupply of material was
not As fault because the orders were made upon the
recommendation of Construction Department.
5. Upon As request for early retirement by September
2014, the Chairman of the Board of Directors initially
approved it, but suddenly states that it is provisional. A
objected and received a notice from Company B.
6. A asked for extension of time to answer the notice; the
first one was granted, while the second one was denied
and she was illegally dismissed from her service.
7. The records show that she was only given one notice
which is non-compliance to the twin notice rule of the
Labor Code.
8. Therefore, where Company B was given all the
reasonable opportunities to justify that A was not
illegally dismissed, Company B failed to support and
justify their claim. Under any circumstances, it is just to
conclude that A, whos engaged to perform activities
necessary to the usual trade or business of Company B
and an employee who has rendered service for more
than one year, was illegally dismissed by Company B.
Furthermore, with her illegal dismissal from service, A
has suffered damages, also her right as an employee
was violated.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most

respectfully reiterated for the Honorable Labor Arbiter to:
1. Declare the dismissal of Complainant A to be illegal;
2. Order the Respondent Company B to pay A backwages
from the time of her illegal dismissal to the time of her
actual reinstatement;
3. Order the Company B to pay A damages in the amount
of P20,000.00 by way of moral damages and
P10,000.00 by way of exemplary damages.

By:

EDMON EVANGELISTA
IBP No. 12345/1-5-17
PTR No. 2234234/1-6-17
Roll No. 54545
MCLE no. 5252, May 6, 2016
Tel No. 740-4005
 LEGAL FORMS

Tutorial
Dean Ferdinand Tan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Notice of Lis Pendens

2. Third Party Complaint
3. Complaint in Intervention
4. Notice of Withdrawal of Complaint
5. Motion of Withdrawal of Complaint
6. Answer with Counterclaim
7. Amended Complaint
8. Reply
9. Pre Trial Brief
10. Motion for Bill of Particulars
11. Motion to Dismiss
12. Motion to Declare Defendant in Default
13. Motion to Set Aside Judgment by Default
14. Motion to lift order of Default
15. Motion to Serve Summon by Publication

By:

Evangelista, Jason B.
2002-111351