4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.

:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE

ChanRobles VirtualLawLibrary

Tweet

|chanrobles.com
Search

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2013 > September 2013 Decisions > G.R. No. 180284,
September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:

Search
G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,
Respondent.

ChanRoblesOnLineBarReview

FIRSTDIVISION
G.R.No.180284,September11,2013
NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.
DECISION
VILLARAMA,JR.,J.:

Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari which seeks to reverse and set aside the
Decision1datedJuly18,2006andResolution2datedOctober19,2007oftheCourtofAppeals(CA)in
CAG.R.CVNo.64379.
Thefactualantecedents:
OnMay26,1995,AnnabelleMatusalem(respondent)filedacomplaintforSupport/Damagesagainst
Narciso Salas (petitioner) in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) ofCabanatuan City (Civil Case No. 2124
AF).

DebtKollectCompany,Inc.

Respondent claimed that petitioner is. the father of her son Christian Paulo Salas who was born on
December28,1994.Petitioner,already56yearsoldatthetime,enticedherasshewasthenonly24
yearsold,makingherbelievethatheisawidower.Petitionerrentedanapartmentwhererespondent
stayed and shouldered all expenses in the delivery of their child, including the cost of caesarian
operation and hospital confinement. However, when respondent refused the offer of petitioners
familytotakethechildfromher,petitionerabandonedrespondentandherchildandleftthemtothe
mercy of relatives and friends. Respondent further alleged that she attempted suicide due to
depressionbutstillpetitionerrefusedtosupportherandtheirchild.
RespondentthusprayedforsupportpendenteliteandmonthlysupportintheamountofP20,000.00,
aswellasactual,moralandexemplarydamages,andattorneysfees.

ChanRoblesIntellectualProperty
Division

Petitioner filed his answer4 with special and affirmative defenses and counterclaims. He described
respondent as a woman of loose morals, having borne her first child also out of wedlock when she
went to work in Italy. Jobless upon her return to the country, respondent spent time riding on
petitionersjeepneywhichwasthenbeingutilizedbyafemalerealestateagentnamedFelicisimade
Guzman. Respondent had seduced a senior police officer in San Isidro and her charge of sexual
abuse against said police officer was later withdrawn in exchange for the quashing of drug charges
against respondents brotherinlaw who was then detained at the municipal jail. It was at that time
respondent introduced herself to petitioner whom she pleaded for charity as she was pregnant with
anotherchild.PetitionerdeniedpaternityofthechildChristianPaulohewasmotivatedbynoother
reason except genuine altruism when he agreed to shoulder the expenses for the delivery of said
child, unaware of respondents chicanery and deceit designed to scandalize him in exchange for
financialfavor.
At the trial, respondent and her witness Grace Murillo testified. Petitioner was declared to have
waived his right to present evidence and the case was considered submitted for decision based on
respondentsevidence.
RespondenttestifiedthatshefirstmetpetitioneratthehouseofhiskumadreFelicisimadeGuzman
at Bgy. Malapit, San Isidro, Nueva Ecija. During their subsequent meeting, petitioner told her he is
alreadyawidowerandhehasnomorecompanioninlifebecausehischildrenareallgrownup.She
also learned that petitioner owns a rice mill, a construction business and a housing subdivision
(petitionerofferedherajobattheirfamilyownedMa.CristinaVillage).Petitioneratthetimealready
knows that she is a single mother as she had a child by her former boyfriend in Italy. He then
broughthertoamotel,promisingthathewilltakecareofherandmarryher.Shebelievedhimand
yielded to his advances, with the thought that she and her child will have a better life. Thereafter,
theysaweachotherweeklyandpetitionergavehermoneyforherchild.Whenshebecamepregnant
with petitioners child, it was only then she learned that he is in fact not a widower. She wanted to
abortthebabybutpetitioneropposeditbecausehewantedtohaveanotherchild.5

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

1/9

4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE
On the fourth month of her pregnancy, petitioner rented an apartment where she stayed with a
housemaid he also provided for all their expenses. She gave birth to their child on December 28,
1994attheGoodSamaritanHospitalinCabanatuanCity.Beforedelivery,petitionerevenwalkedher
atthehospitalroomandmassagedherstomach,sayinghehadnotdonethistohiswife.Shefilled
out the form for the childs birth certificate and wrote all the information supplied by petitioner
himself. It was also petitioner who paid the hospital bills and drove her baby home. He was excited
andhappytohaveasonathisadvancedagewhoishislookalike,andthiswaswitnessedbyother
boarders,visitorsandGraceMurillo,theowneroftheapartmentunitpetitionerrented.However,on
the 18th day after the babys birth, petitioner went to Baguio City for a medical checkup. He
confessed to her daughter and eventually his wife was also informed about his having sired an
illegitimatechild.Hisfamilythendecidedtoadoptthebabyandjustgiverespondentmoneysoshe
cangoabroad.Whensherefusedthisoffer,petitionerstoppedseeingherandsendingmoneytoher.
Sheandherbabysurvivedthroughthehelpofrelativesandfriends.Depressed,shetriedtocommit
suicidebydrugoverdoseandwasbroughttothehospitalbyMurillowhopaidthebill.Murillosought
thehelpoftheCabanatuanCityPoliceStationwhichsettheirmeetingwithpetitioner.However,itwas
only petitioners wife who showed up and she was very mad, uttering unsavory words against
respondent.6
Murillocorroboratedrespondentstestimonyastothepaymentbypetitionerofapartmentrental,his
weekly visits to respondent and financial support to her, his presence during and after delivery of
respondentsbaby,respondentsattemptedsuicidethroughsleepingpillsoverdoseandhospitalization
for which she paid the bill, her complaint before the police authorities and meeting with petitioners
wifeattheheadquarters.7
OnApril5,1999,thetrialcourtrendereditsdecision8infavorofrespondent,thedispositiveportion
ofwhichreads:

c h a n Ro b le s v ir t u a lL a wlib r a r y

WHEREFORE,premisesconsidered,judgmentisherebyrenderedinfavoroftheplaintiff
andagainstthedefendantasfollows:
1.Ordering the defendant to give as monthly support of TWO
THOUSAND (P2,000.00) PESOS for the child Christian Paulo
throughthemother
2.DirectingthedefendanttopaytheplaintiffthesumofP20,000.00
bywayoflitigationexpensesand
3.Topaythecostsofsuit.
SOORDERED.9
PetitionerappealedtotheCAarguingthat:(1)thetrialcourtdecidedthecasewithoutaffordinghim
therighttointroduceevidenceonhisdefenseand(2)thetrialcourterredinfindingthatpetitioneris
theputativefatherofChristianPauloandorderinghimtogivemonthlysupport.

ByDecisiondatedJuly18,2006,theCAdismissedpetitionersappeal.Theappellatecourtfoundno
reason to disturb the trial courts exercise of discretion in denying petitioners motion for
postponement on April 17, 1998, the scheduled hearing for the initial presentation of defendants
evidence,andthemotionforreconsiderationofthesaidorderdenyingthemotionforpostponement
andsubmittingthecasefordecision.
On the paternity issue, the CA affirmed the trial courts ruling that respondent satisfactorily
established the illegitimate filiation of her son Christian Paulo, and consequently no error was
committed by the trial court in granting respondents prayer for support. The appellate court thus
held:

c h a n Ro b le s v ir t u a lL a wlib r a r y

September2013Jurisprudence

A.C.No.9149,September04,2013JULIANPENILLA,
Complainant, v. ATTY. QUINTIN P. ALCID, JR.,
Respondent.
G.R.No.166836,September04,2013SANMIGUEL
PROPERTIES, INC., Petitioner, v. SEC. HERNANDO B.
PEREZ, ALBERT C. AGUIRRE, TEODORO B. ARCENAS,
JR., MAXY S. ABAD, JAMES G. BARBERS, STEPHEN N.
SARINO, ENRIQUE N. ZALAMEA, JR., MARIANO M.
MARTIN, ORLANDO O. SAMSON, CATHERINE R.
AGUIRRE,ANDANTONIOV.AGCAOILI,Respondents.
G.R. No. 194948, September 02, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. FREDDY
SALONGAYAFIADO,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 189874, September 04, 2013 RODULFO
VALCURZA AND BEATRIZ LASAGA, SPOUSES RONALDO
GADIAN & JULIETA TAGALOG, SPOUSES ALLAN
VALCURZA AND GINA LABADO, SPOUSES ROLDAN
JUMAWAN
AND
RUBY
VALCURZA,
SPOUSES
EMPERATREZ VALCURZA AND ENRIQUE VALCURZA,
CIRILA PANTUHAN, SPOUSES DANIEL VALCURZA AND
JOVETA RODELA, SPOUSES LORETO NAELGA AND
REMEDIOSDAROY,SPOUSESVERGILIOVALCURZAAND
ROSARIO SINELLO, SPOUSES PATRICIO EBANIT AND
OTHELIA CABANDAY, SPOUSES ABNER MEDIO AND
MIRIAM TAGALOG, SPOUSES CARMEN MAGTRAYO AND
MEDIO MAGTRAYO, SPOUSES MARIO VALCURZA AND
EDITHA MARBA, SPOUSES ADELARDO VALCURZA AND
PRISCILLA LAGUE, SPOUSES VICTOR VALCURZA AND
MERUBELLA BEHAG, AND SPOUSES HENRY MEDIO AND
ROSALINDAALOLHA,Petitioners,v.ATTY.CASIMIRON.
TAMPARONG,JR.,Respondent.

Christian Paulo, in instant case, does not enjoy the benefit of a record of birth in the
civil registry which bears acknowledgment signed by Narciso Salas. He cannot claim
openandcontinuouspossessionofthestatusofanillegitimatechild.
It had been established by plaintiffs evidence, however, that during her pregnancy,
Annabelle was provided by Narciso Salas with an apartment at a rental of P1,500.00
whichhepaidfor(TSN,October6,1995,p.18).Narcisoprovidedherwithahousehold
helpwithasalaryofP1,500.00amonth(TSN,October6,1995,ibid).Healsoprovided
heramonthlyfoodallowanceofP1,500.00(Ibid,p.18).NarcisowaswithAnnabelleat
thehospitalwhilethelatterwasinlabor,walkingheraroundandmassagingherbelly
(Ibid, p. 11). Narciso brought home Christian Paulo to the rented apartment after
Annabellesdischargefromthehospital.Peoplelivinginthesameapartmentunitswere
witnesses to Narcisos delight to father a son at his age which was his look alike. It
was only after the 18th day when Annabelle refused to give him Christian Paulo that
Narcisowithdrewhissupporttohimandhismother.
SaidtestimonyofAnnabelleasidefromhavingbeencorroboratedbyGraceMurillo,the
owner of the apartment which Narciso rented, was never rebutted on record. Narciso
didnotpresentanyevidence,verbalordocumentary,torepudiateplaintiffsevidence.
In the cases of Lim vs. CA (270 SCRA 1) and Rodriguez vs. CA (245 SCRA 150), the
Supreme Court made it clear that Article 172 of the Family Code is an adaptation of
Article283oftheCivilCode.Saidlegalprovisionprovidesthatthefatherisobligedto
recognize the child as his natural child x x 3) when the child has in his favor any
evidenceorproofthatthedefendantishisfather.
Infact,inIlanovs.CA(230SCRA242,258259),itwasheldthat
The last paragraph of Article 283 contains a blanket provision that
practically covers all the other cases in the preceding paragraphs. Any
otherevidenceorproofthatthedefendantisthefatherisbroadenough
to render unnecessary the other paragraphs of this article. When the
evidence submitted in the action for compulsory recognition is not
sufficienttomeet[the]requirementsofthefirstthreeparagraphs,itmay
stillbeenoughunderthelastparagraph.Thisparagraphpermitshearsay
and reputation evidence, as provided in the Rules of Court, with respect
toillegitimatefiliation.

G.R. No. 157943, September 04, 2013 PEOPLE OF

THEPHILIPPINES,PlaintiffAppellee,v.GILBERTREYES
WAGAS,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 170604, September 02, 2013 HEIRS OF
MARGARITA PRODON, Petitioners, v. HEIRS OF
MAXIMO S. ALVAREZ AND VALENTINA CLAVE,
REPRESENTED BY REV. MAXIMO ALVAREZ, JR.,
Respondents.

AsanecessaryconsequenceofthefindingthatChristianPauloisthesonofdefendant
NarcisoSalas,heisentitledtosupportfromthelatter(Ilanovs.CA,supra).
It shall be demandable from the time the person who has the right to recover the
sameneedsitformaintenancexx.(Art.203,FamilyCodeofthePhilippines).10

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

2/9

4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE
G.R. No. 160316, September 02, 2013 ROSALINDA
PUNZALAN, RANDALL PUNZALAN AND RAINIER
PUNZALAN,Petitioners,v.MICHAELGAMALIELJ.PLATA
ANDRUBENPLATA,Respondents.
G.R. No. 198174, September 02, 2013 ALPHA
INSURANCE AND SURETY CO., Petitioner, v. ARSENIA
SONIACASTOR,Respondent.
G.R. No. 200508, September 04, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. CHRISTOPHER
RIVERAYROYO,AccusedAppellant.
A.M. No. RTJ122320, September 02, 2013 COL.
DANILO E. LUBATON (RETIRED, PNP), Complainant, v.
JUDGE MARY JOSEPHINE P. LAZARO, REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT,BRANCH74,ANTIPOLOCITY,Respondent.
G.R. No. 182571, September 02, 2013 LIGAYA
ESGUERRA,
LOWELL
ESGUERRA
AND
LIESELL
ESGUERRA, Petitioners, v. HOLCIM PHILIPPINES, INC.,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 204169, September 11, 2013 YASUO
IWASAWA, Petitioner, v. FELISA CUSTODIO GANGAN
(A.K.A FELISA GANGAN ARAMBULO, AND FELISA
GANGANIWASAWA)ANDTHELOCALCIVILREGISTRAR
OFPASAYCITY,Respondents.
G.R. No. 162226, September 02, 2013
SANGGUNIANG BARANGAY OF PANGASUGAN, BAYBAY,
LEYTE,
Petitioner,
v.
EXPLORATION
PERMIT
APPLICATION (EXPA000005VIII) OF PHILIPPINE
NATIONALOILCOMPANY,Respondent.
G.R. No. 189822, September 02, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. BRION, JOJIE
SUANSING,AccusedAppellant.
G.R.No.170388,September04,2013COLEGIODEL
SANTISIMO ROSARIO AND SR. ZENAIDA S. MOFADA,
OP,Petitioners,v.EMMANUELROJO,Respondent.
A.M.No.MTJ071683,September11,2013OFFICE
OFTHECOURTADMINISTRATOR,Complainant,v.HON.
SANTIAGO E. SORIANO, FORMER ACTING PRESIDING
JUDGE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, SAN
FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION, AND PRESIDING JUDGE,
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, NAGUILIAN, LA UNION,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 169461, September 02, 2013 FIRST GAS
POWERCORPORATION,Petitioner,v.REPUBLICOFTHE
PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICE OF THE
SOLICITORGENERAL,Respondent.
A.C.No.9149,September04,2013JULIANPENILLA,
Complainant, v. ATTY. QUINTIN P. ALCID, JR.,
Respondent.
G.R.No.166836,September04,2013SANMIGUEL
PROPERTIES, INC., Petitioner, v. SEC. HERNANDO B.
PEREZ, ALBERT C. AGUIRRE, TEODORO B. ARCENAS,
JR., MAXY S. ABAD, JAMES G. BARBERS, STEPHEN N.
SARINO, ENRIQUE N. ZALAMEA, JR., MARIANO M.
MARTIN, ORLANDO O. SAMSON, CATHERINE R.
AGUIRRE,ANDANTONIOV.AGCAOILI,Respondents.
G.R. No. 194948, September 02, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. FREDDY
SALONGAYAFIADO,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 189874, September 04, 2013 RODULFO
VALCURZA AND BEATRIZ LASAGA, SPOUSES RONALDO
GADIAN & JULIETA TAGALOG, SPOUSES ALLAN
VALCURZA AND GINA LABADO, SPOUSES ROLDAN
JUMAWAN
AND
RUBY
VALCURZA,
SPOUSES
EMPERATREZ VALCURZA AND ENRIQUE VALCURZA,
CIRILA PANTUHAN, SPOUSES DANIEL VALCURZA AND
JOVETA RODELA, SPOUSES LORETO NAELGA AND
REMEDIOSDAROY,SPOUSESVERGILIOVALCURZAAND
ROSARIO SINELLO, SPOUSES PATRICIO EBANIT AND
OTHELIA CABANDAY, SPOUSES ABNER MEDIO AND
MIRIAM TAGALOG, SPOUSES CARMEN MAGTRAYO AND
MEDIO MAGTRAYO, SPOUSES MARIO VALCURZA AND
EDITHA MARBA, SPOUSES ADELARDO VALCURZA AND
PRISCILLA LAGUE, SPOUSES VICTOR VALCURZA AND
MERUBELLA BEHAG, AND SPOUSES HENRY MEDIO AND
ROSALINDAALOLHA,Petitioners,v.ATTY.CASIMIRON.
TAMPARONG,JR.,Respondent.
G.R. No. 170604, September 02, 2013 HEIRS OF
MARGARITA PRODON, Petitioners, v. HEIRS OF
MAXIMO S. ALVAREZ AND VALENTINA CLAVE,
REPRESENTED BY REV. MAXIMO ALVAREZ, JR.,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 157943, September 04, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THEPHILIPPINES,PlaintiffAppellee,v.GILBERTREYES
WAGAS,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 160316, September 02, 2013 ROSALINDA
PUNZALAN, RANDALL PUNZALAN AND RAINIER
PUNZALAN,Petitioners,v.MICHAELGAMALIELJ.PLATA
ANDRUBENPLATA,Respondents.
G.R. No. 198174, September 02, 2013 ALPHA
INSURANCE AND SURETY CO., Petitioner, v. ARSENIA
SONIACASTOR,Respondent.
G.R. No. 200508, September 04, 2013 PEOPLE OF

PetitionerfiledamotionforreconsiderationbutitwasdeniedbytheCA.
Hence,thispetitionsubmittingthefollowingarguments:

c h a n Ro b le s v ir t u a lL a wlib r a r y

1. THE VENUE OF THE CASE WAS IMPROPERLY LAID BEFORE THE REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT OF CABANATUAN CITY CONSIDERING THAT BOTH PETITIONER AND
RESPONDENTAREACTUALRESIDENTSOFBRGY.MALAPIT,SANISIDRO,NUEVAECIJA.
2. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN PRONOUNCING THAT PETITIONER
WAS AFFORDED THE FULL MEASURE OF HIS RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND IN
UPHOLDING THAT THE TRIAL COURT DID NOT GRAVELY ABUSE ITS DISCRETION
AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION WHEN IT DECIDED THE INSTANT
CASEWITHOUTAFFORDINGPETITIONERTHERIGHTTOINTRODUCEEVIDENCEINHIS
DEFENSE.
3. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE FILIATION OF
CHRISTIANPAULOWASDULYESTABLISHEDPURSUANTTOARTICLE175INRELATION
TO ARTICLE 172 OF THE FAMILY CODE AND EXISTING JURISPRUDENCE AND
THEREFOREENTITLEDTOSUPPORTFROMTHEPETITIONER.11
Wegrantthepetition.
It is a legal truism that the rules on the venue of personal actions are fixed for the convenience of
theplaintiffsandtheirwitnesses.Equallysettled,however,istheprinciplethatchoosingthevenueof
anactionisnotlefttoaplaintiffscapricethematterisregulatedbytheRulesofCourt.12
Inpersonalactionssuchastheinstantcase,theRulesgivetheplaintifftheoptionofchoosingwhere
to file his complaint. He can file it in the place (1) where he himself or any of them resides, or (2)
where the defendant or any of the defendants resides or may be found.13 The plaintiff or the
defendantmustberesidentsoftheplacewheretheactionhasbeeninstitutedatthetimetheaction
iscommenced.14
However,petitionerraisedtheissueofimpropervenueforthefirsttimeintheAnsweritselfandno
prior motion to dismiss based on such ground was filed. Under the Rules of Court before the 1997
amendments,anobjectiontoanimpropervenuemustbemadebeforearesponsivepleadingisfiled.
Otherwise,itwillbedeemedwaived.15Nothavingbeentimelyraised,petitionersobjectiononvenue
isthereforedeemedwaived.
As to the denial of the motion for postponement filed by his counsel for the resetting of the initial
presentationofdefenseevidenceonApril17,1998,wefindthatitwasnotthefirsttimepetitioners
motionforpostponementwasdeniedbythetrialcourt.
Records disclosed that after the termination of the testimony of respondents last witness on
November 29, 1996, the trial court as prayed for by the parties, set the continuation of hearing for
thereceptionofevidenceforthedefendant(petitioner)onJanuary27,February3,andFebruary10,
1997.IntheOrderdatedDecember17,1996,petitionerwasadvisedtobereadywithhisevidenceat
those hearing dates earlier scheduled. At the hearing on January 27, 1997, petitioners former
counsel, Atty. Rolando S. Bala, requested for the cancellation of the February 3 and 10, 1997
hearingsinordertogivehimtimetoprepareforhisdefense,whichrequestwasgrantedbythetrial
courtwhichthusresetthehearingdatestoMarch3,14and17,1997.OnMarch3,1997,uponoral
manifestationbyAtty.Balaandwithoutobjectionfromrespondentscounsel,Atty.FelicianoWycoco,
the trial court again reset the hearing to March 14 and 17, 1997. With the nonappearance of both
petitioner and Atty. Bala on March 14, 1997, the trial court upon oral manifestation by Atty. Wycoco
declared their absence as a waiver of their right to present evidence and accordingly deemed the
casesubmittedfordecision.16
On July 4, 1997, Atty. Bala withdrew as counsel for petitioner and Atty. Rafael E. Villarosa filed his
appearance as his new counsel on July 21, 1997. On the same date he filed entry of appearance,
Atty. Villarosa filed a motion for reconsideration of the March 14, 1997 Order pleading for liberality
andmagnanimityofthetrialcourt,withoutofferinganyexplanationforAtty.Balasfailuretoappear
for the initial presentation of their evidence. The trial court thereupon reconsidered its March 14,
1997Order,findingitbettertogivepetitionerachancetopresenthisevidence.OnAugust26,1997,
Atty. Villarosa received a notice of hearing for the presentation of their evidence scheduled on
September22,1997.OnAugust29,1997,thetrialcourtreceivedhismotionrequestingthatthesaid
hearing be reset to October 10, 1997 for the reason that he had requested the postponement of a
hearing in another case which was incidentally scheduled on September 22, 23 and 24, 1997. As
prayedfor,thetrialcourtresetthehearingtoOctober10,1997.Onsaiddate,however,thehearing
wasagainmovedtoDecember15,1997.OnFebruary16,1998,thetrialcourtitselfresetthehearing
toApril17,1998sinceitwasunclearwhetherAtty.Wycocoreceivedacopyofthemotion.17
OnApril17,1998,petitionerandhiscounselfailedtoappearbutthetrialcourtreceivedonApril16,
1998anurgentmotiontocancelhearingfiledbyAtty.Villarosa.Thereasongivenbythelatterwas
thescheduledhearingontheissuanceofwritofpreliminaryinjunctioninanothercaseundertheApril
8, 1998 Order issued by the RTC of Gapan, Nueva Ecija, Branch 36 in Civil Case No. 1946. But as
clearly stated in the said order, it was the plaintiffs therein who requested the postponement of the
hearing and it behoved Atty. Villarosa to inform the RTC of Gapan that he had a previous
commitment considering that the April 17, 1998 hearing was scheduled as early as February 16,
1998. Acting on the motion for postponement, the trial court denied for the second time petitioners
motion for postponement. Even at the hearing of their motion for reconsideration of the April 17,
1998OrderonSeptember21,1998,Atty.Villarosafailedtoappearandinsteadfiledanothermotion
forpostponement.Thetrialcourtthusorderedthatthecasebesubmittedfordecisionstressingthat
thecasehadlongbeenpendingandthatpetitionerandhiscounselhavebeengivenopportunitiesto
presenttheirevidence.ItlikewisedeniedasecondmotionforreconsiderationfiledbyAtty.Villarosa,
whoarrivedlateduringthehearingthereofonDecember4,1998.18
A motion for continuance or postponement is not a matter of right, but a request addressed to the
sound discretion of the court. Parties asking for postponement have absolutely no right to assume
that their motions would be granted. Thus, they must be prepared on the day of the hearing.19
Indeed, an order declaring a party to have waived the right to present evidence for performing
dilatoryactionsupholdsthetrialcourtsdutytoensurethattrialproceedsdespitethedeliberatedelay
andrefusaltoproceedonthepartofoneparty.20
Atty. Villarosas plea for liberality was correctly rejected by the trial court in view of his own
negligenceinfailingtoensuretherewillbenoconflictinhistrialschedules.AsweheldinTiomico v.
CourtofAppeals21:

c h a n Ro b le s v ir t u a lL a wlib r a r y

MotionsforpostponementaregenerallyfrowneduponbyCourtsifthereisevidenceof

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

3/9

4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE
bad faith, malice or inexcusable negligence on the part of the movant. The
inadvertence of the defense counsel in failing to take note of the trial dates and in
belatedly informing the trial court of any conflict in his schedules of trial or court
appearances, constitutes inexcusable negligence. It should be borne in mind that a
client is bound by his counsels conduct, negligence and mistakes in handling the
case.22

THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. CHRISTOPHER

RIVERAYROYO,AccusedAppellant.
A.M. No. RTJ122320, September 02, 2013 COL.
DANILO E. LUBATON (RETIRED, PNP), Complainant, v.
JUDGE MARY JOSEPHINE P. LAZARO, REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT,BRANCH74,ANTIPOLOCITY,Respondent.
G.R. No. 182571, September 02, 2013 LIGAYA
ESGUERRA,
LOWELL
ESGUERRA
AND
LIESELL
ESGUERRA, Petitioners, v. HOLCIM PHILIPPINES, INC.,
Respondent.

With our finding that there was no abuse of discretion in the trial courts denial of the motion for
postponementfiledbypetitionerscounsel,petitionerscontentionthathewasdeprivedofhisdayin
courtmustlikewisefail.Theessenceofdueprocessisthatapartyisgivenareasonableopportunity
tobeheardandsubmitanyevidenceonemayhaveinsupportofonesdefense.Whereapartywas
afforded an opportunity to participate in the proceedings but failed to do so, he cannot complain of
deprivation of due process. If the opportunity is not availed of, it is deemed waived or forfeited
withoutviolatingtheconstitutionalguarantee.23

G.R. No. 204169, September 11, 2013 YASUO

IWASAWA, Petitioner, v. FELISA CUSTODIO GANGAN1
(A.K.A FELISA GANGAN ARAMBULO, AND FELISA
GANGANIWASAWA)ANDTHELOCALCIVILREGISTRAR
OFPASAYCITY,Respondents.

We now proceed to the main issue of whether the trial and appellate courts erred in ruling that
respondents evidence sufficiently proved that her son Christian Paulo is the illegitimate child of
petitioner.

G.R. No. 162226, September 02, 2013

SANGGUNIANG BARANGAY OF PANGASUGAN, BAYBAY,
LEYTE,
Petitioner,
v.
EXPLORATION
PERMIT
APPLICATION (EXPA000005VIII) OF PHILIPPINE
NATIONALOILCOMPANY,Respondent.

UnderArticle175oftheFamilyCodeofthePhilippines,illegitimatefiliationmaybeestablishedinthe
samewayandonthesameevidenceaslegitimatechildren.

G.R. No. 189822, September 02, 2013 PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. BRION, JOJIE
SUANSING,AccusedAppellant.

Article172oftheFamilyCodeofthePhilippinesstates:

(1)Therecordofbirthappearinginthecivilregisterorafinaljudgmentor
(2) An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private handwritten
instrumentandsignedbytheparentconcerned.

G.R. No. 169461, September 02, 2013 FIRST GAS

POWERCORPORATION,Petitioner,v.REPUBLICOFTHE
PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICE OF THE
SOLICITORGENERAL,Respondent.

Intheabsenceoftheforegoingevidence,thelegitimatefiliationshallbeprovedby:
(1)Theopenandcontinuouspossessionofthestatusofalegitimatechildor

A.M.No.MTJ071683,September11,2013OFFICE
OFTHECOURTADMINISTRATOR,Complainant,v.HON.
SANTIAGO E. SORIANO, FORMER ACTING PRESIDING
JUDGE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, SAN
FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION, AND PRESIDING JUDGE,
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, NAGUILIAN, LA UNION,
Respondent.

G.R.No.184732,September09,2013CORAZONS.
CRUZ UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE,VILLA CORAZON
CONDO
DORMITORY,
Petitioner,
v.
MANILA
INTERNATIONALAIRPORTAUTHORITY,Respondent.
A.M. No. P041903 (Formerly A.M. No. 0410597
RTC), September 10, 2013 OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. DONABEL M.
SAVADERA, MA. EVELYN M. LANDICHO AND
CONCEPCION G. SAYAS, ALL OF THE RTC, OCC, LIPA
CITY, BATANGAS, ATTY. CELSO M. APUSEN AND ATTY.
SHEILAANGELAP.SARMIENTO,Respondents.
G.R. Nos. 16727475, September 11, 2013
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v.
FORTUNETOBACCOCORPORATION,Respondent.G.R.
No.192576,September11,2013FORTUNETOBACCO
CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF
INTERNALREVENUE,Respondent.
G.R. No. 174461, September 11, 2013 LETICIA I.
KUMMER, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G.R. Nos. 175277 & 175285, September 11, 2013
UNICAPITAL, INC., UNICAPITAL REALTY, INC., AND
JAIME J. MARTIREZ, Petitioners, v. RAFAEL JOSE
CONSING, JR. AND THE PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE
REGIONALTRIALCOURTOFPASIGCITY,BRANCH168,
Respondents.G.R.No.192073,September11,2013
RAFAEL JOSE CONSING, JR., Petitioner, v. HON.
MARISSA MACARAIGGUILLEN, IN HER CAPACITY AS
THEPRESIDINGJUDGEOFTHEREGIONALTRIALCOURT
OF MAKATI CITY, BRANCH 60 AND UNICAPITAL, INC.,
Respondents.
A.C. No. 9860, September 11, 2013 JOSEPHINE L.
OROLA, MYRNA L. OROLA, MANUEL L. OROLA, MARY
ANGELYNOROLABELARGA,MARJORIEMELBAOROLA
CALIP, AND KAREN OROLA, Complainants, v. ATTY.
JOSEPHADORRAMOS,Respondent.
G.R. Nos. 187308 & 187517, September 18, 2013

Thefiliationoflegitimatechildrenisestablishedbyanyofthefollowing:

G.R.No.170388,September04,2013COLEGIODEL
SANTISIMO ROSARIO AND SR. ZENAIDA S. MOFADA,
OP,Petitioners,v.EMMANUELROJO,*Respondent.

G.R. No. 167484, September 09, 2013 HERNANDO

BORRA, JOHN PACHEO, DANILO PEREZ, FELIZARDO
SIMON, RAMON BUENACOSA, JR., FELIX BELADOR,
WILFREDO LUPO, RONALD VILLARIAS, ARSENIO
MINDANAO, MAX NONALA, SIMPLICIO DE ERIT, NOEL
DONGUINES,JULIOBORRA,MELCHORJAVIER,JOHNNY
ENRICO VARGAS, PAQUITO SONDIA, JOSE SALAJOG,
ELMERLUPO,RAZULARANEZ,NELSONPEREZ,BALBINO
ABLAY, FERNANDO SIMON, JIMMY VILLARTA, ROMEO
CAINDOC, SALVADOR SANTILLAN, ROMONEL JANEO,
ERNESTO GONZALUDO, JOSE PAJES, ROY TAN,
FERNANDO SANTILLAN JR., DEMETRIO SEMILLA, RENE
CORDERO, EDUARDO MOLENO, ROMY DINAGA,
HERNANDO GUMBAN, FEDERICO ALVARICO, ELMER
CATO, ROGELIO CORDERO, RODNEY PAJES, ERNIE
BAYER, ARMANDO TABARES, NOLI AMADOR, MARIO
SANTILLAN, ALANIL TRASMONTE, VICTOR ORTEGA,
JOEVING ROQUERO, CYRUS PINAS, DANILO PERALES,
AND ALFONSO COSAS, JR., Petitioners, v. COURT OF
APPEALS SECOND AND NINETEENTH DIVISIONS AND
HAWAIIANPHILIPPINECOMPANY,Respondents.

c h a n Ro b le s v ir t u a lL a wlib r a r y

(2) Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws. (Underscoring
supplied.)
RespondentpresentedtheCertificateofLiveBirth24(ExhibitA1)ofChristianPauloSalasinwhich
thenameofpetitionerappearsashisfatherbutwhichisnotsignedbyhim.Admittedly,itwasonly
respondentwhofilleduptheentriesandsignedthesaiddocumentthoughsheclaimsitwaspetitioner
whosuppliedtheinformationshewrotetherein.

We have held that a certificate of live birth purportedly identifying the putative father is not
competentevidenceofpaternitywhenthereisnoshowingthattheputativefatherhadahandinthe
preparation of the certificate.25 Thus, if the father did not sign in the birth certificate, the placing of
his name by the mother, doctor, registrar, or other person is incompetent evidence of paternity.26
Neither can such birth certificate be taken as a recognition in a public instrument27 and it has no

probativevaluetoestablishfiliationtotheallegedfather.28
AstotheBaptismalCertificate 29(ExhibitB)ofChristianPauloSalasalsoindicatingpetitionerasthe
father,wehaveruledthatwhilebaptismalcertificatesmaybeconsideredpublicdocuments,theycan
only serve as evidence of the administration of the sacraments on the dates so specified. They are
not necessarily competent evidence of the veracity of entries therein with respect to the childs
paternity.30
Therestofrespondentsdocumentaryevidenceconsistsofhandwrittennotesandletters,hospitalbill
andphotographstakenofpetitionerandrespondentinsidetheirrentedapartmentunit.
Picturestakenofthemotherandherchildtogetherwiththeallegedfatherareinconclusiveevidence
to prove paternity.31 Exhibits E and F32 showing petitioner and respondent inside the rented
apartmentunitthushavescantevidentiaryvalue.TheStatementofAccount33(ExhibitC)fromthe
Good Samaritan General Hospital where respondent herself was indicated as the payee is likewise
incompetenttoprovethatpetitioneristhefatherofherchildnotwithstandingpetitionersadmissionin
hisanswerthatheshoulderedtheexpensesinthedeliveryofrespondentschildasanactofcharity.
As to the handwritten notes34 (Exhibits D to D13) of petitioner and respondent showing their
exchange of affectionate words and romantic trysts, these, too, are not sufficient to establish
Christian Paulos filiation to petitioner as they were not signed by petitioner and contained no
statementofadmissionbypetitionerthatheisthefatherofsaidchild.Thus,evenifthesenoteswere
authentic, they do not qualify under Article 172 (2) vis vis Article 175 of the Family Code which
admitsascompetentevidenceofillegitimatefiliationanadmissionoffiliationinaprivatehandwritten
instrumentsignedbytheparentconcerned.35
Petitioners reliance on our ruling in Lim v. Court of Appeals36 is misplaced. In the said case, the
handwritten letters of petitioner contained a clear admission that he is the father of private
respondentsdaughterandweresignedbyhim.TheCourtthereinconsideredthetotalityofevidence
which established beyond reasonable doubt that petitioner was indeed the father of private
respondents daughter. On the other hand, in Ilano v. Court of Appeals,37 the Court sustained the
appellatecourtsfindingthatprivaterespondentsevidencetoestablishherfiliationwithandpaternity
of petitioner was overwhelming, particularly the latters public acknowledgment of his amorous
relationship with private respondents mother, and private respondent as his own child through acts
andwords,hertestimonialevidencetothateffectwasfullysupportedbydocumentaryevidence.The
Courtthusruledthatrespondenthadadducedsufficientproofofcontinuouspossessionofstatusofa
spuriouschild.
Here,whiletheCAheldthatChristianPauloSalascouldnotclaimopenandcontinuouspossessionof
status of an illegitimate child, it nevertheless considered the testimonial evidence sufficient proof to
establishhisfiliationtopetitioner.
Anillegitimatechildisnowalsoallowedtoestablishhisclaimedfiliationbyanyothermeansallowed
by the Rules of Court and special laws, like his baptismal certificate, a judicial admission, a family
Bibleinwhichhisnamehasbeenentered,commonreputationrespectinghispedigree,admissionby
silence,thetestimoniesofwitnesses,andotherkindsofproofadmissibleunderRule130oftheRules
of Court.38 Reviewing the records, we find the totality of respondents evidence insufficient to
establishthatpetitioneristhefatherofChristianPaulo.
The testimonies of respondent and Murillo as to the circumstances of the birth of Christian Paulo,

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

4/9

4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE
HILARIA BAGAYAS, Petitioner, v. ROGELIO BAGAYAS,
FELICIDAD BAGAYAS, ROSALINA BAGAYAS, MICHAEL
BAGAYAS,ANDMARIELBAGAYAS,Respondents.
G.R.No.179594,September11,2013MANUELUY&
SONS,INC.,Petitioner,v.VALBUECO,INCORPORATED,
Respondent.
G.R. Nos. 17159496, September 18, 2013 ASIA
BREWERY, INC., Petitioner, v. TUNAY NA PAGKAKAISA
NGMGAMANGGAGAWASAASIA(TPMA),Respondent.
G.R.No.203039,September11,2013REPUBLICOF
THEPHILIPPINES,REPRESENTEDBYTHEDEPARTMENT
OFPUBLICWORKSANDHIGHWAYS(DPWH),Petitioner,
v. BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS (BPI),
Respondent.
G.R. No. 174665, September 18, 2013 PHILIPPINE
RECLAMATIONAUTHORITY(FORMERLYKNOWNASTHE
PUBLICESTATESAUTHORITY),Petitioner,v.ROMAGO,
INCORPORATED, Respondent. G.R. No. 175221,
September 18, 2013 ROMAGO, INCORPORATED,
Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE RECLAMATION AUTHORITY
(FORMERLY
PUBLIC
ESTATES
AUTHORITY),
Respondent.
G.R. No. 187731, September 18, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THEPHILIPPINES,PlaintiffAppellee,v.SPO1ALFREDO
ALAWIG,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 184011, September 18, 2013 REYNALDO
HAYAN MOYA, Petitioner, v. FIRST SOLID RUBBER
INDUSTRIES,INC.,Respondent.
G.R. No. 179987, September 03, 2013 HEIRS OF
MARIO MALABANAN, (REPRESENTED BY SALLY A.
MALABANAN), Petitioners, v. REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES,Respondent.
G.R.No.196200,September11,2013ERNESTODY,
Petitioner, v. HON. GINA M. BIBATPALAMOS, IN HER
CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL
TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 64, MAKATI CITY, AND ORIX
METRO LEASING AND FINANCE CORPORATION,
Respondents.
G.R.No.170018,September23,2013DEPARTMENT
OF AGRARIAN REFORM, REPRESENTED BY OIC
SECRETARY NASSER C. PANGANDAMAN, Petitioner, v.
THECOURTOFAPPEALSANDBASILANAGRICULTURAL
TRADINGCORPORATION(BATCO),Respondents.
G.R. No. 203315, September 18, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THEPHILIPPINES,PlaintiffAppellee,v.JOEYBACATAN,
AccusedAppellant.

G.R. No. 182371, September 04, 2013 HEIRS OF

MELENCIO YU AND TALINANAP MATUALAGA (NAMELY:
LEONORA, EDUARDO, VIRGILIO, VILMA, IMELDA,
CYNTHIA, AND NANCY, ALL SURNAMED YU),
REPRESENTED BY LEONORA, VIRGILIO AND VILMA,
Petitioners, v. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS,
SPECIAL TWENTYFIRST DIVISION (TWENTYSECOND
DIVISION) ROSEMARIE D. ANACANDIZON (IN HER
CAPACITYASDIVISIONCLERKOFCOURT)MARIONC.
MIRABUENO (IN HER CAPACITY AS OICCLERK OF
COURT OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, GENERAL
SANTOS CITY), AND HEIRS OF CONCEPCION NON
ANDRES (NAMELY: SERGIO, JR., SOFRONIO AND
GRACELDA,ALLSURNAMEDANDRES),REPRESENTEDBY
GRACELDAN.ANDRES,Respondents.
G.R.No.198075,September04,2013KOPPEL,INC.
(FORMERLYKNOWNASKPLAIRCON,INC.),Petitioner,
v. MAKATI ROTARY CLUB FOUNDATION, INC.,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 167174, September 23, 2013 SPOUSES
CARMELITO AND ANTONIA ALDOVER, Petitioners, v.
THE COURT OF APPEALS, SUSANA AHORRO, ARLINE
SINGSON, BIBIANA CAHIBAYBAYAN, LUMINADA
ERQUIZA,1 ANGELITA ALBERT, JOSELITO ACULA,
SORAYDA ACULA, JOMAR ACULA, CECILIA FAMORCA,
CELESTE
VASQUEZ,
ALFONSO
CABUWAGAN,
CARMELITA RIVERA, JESSIE CAHIBAYBAYAN, MA. ANA
V. TAKEGUCHI, ROSEMARIE BONIFACIO, ANGELINA
FLORES,
ALMACERES
D.
MISHIMA,
AURELIA
CAHIBAYBAYAN,SONIAS.MALAQUE,NORAANTONIO,
REYNALDO ANTONIO, REGINALD ANTONIO, RONALDO
ANTONIO,JR.,JUANITACHING,2MARIETAPACIS,TITO
PACIS,JOSEIBAYAN,ELSIESISON,LEONARDOSISON,
MERCEDES ANTONIO, RICARDO SARMIENTO,3 SERGIO
TEGIO, CRISENCIA FAVILLAR, NELLY FERNANDEZ,
MARILYN DE VEGA, CELIA TUAZON, CELINE RAMOS,
EUTEMIO RAMOS, LUZVIMINDA VERUEN, NICANOR
ORTEZA, ADELAIDA CALUGAN,4 GLORIA AGBUSAC,5
VIRGINIAGAON,REMIGIOMAYBITUIN,LAURAGARCIA,
CHARLES GARCIA, MA. CRISTINA GARCIA,6 RICARDO
SARMIENTO,SR.,ROBERTOTUAZON,GEMMATUAZON,
ANALYN TUAZON, JOHN ROBERT TUAZON, ELJEROME
TUAZON, JEMMALYN TUAZON, MILAGROS TUBIGO,7
MARICAR TUBIGO,8 MARISSA BITUIN,9 ROGER
GOBRIN, MARCELINA RAMOS, ESTRELLA RAMOS,
ALFREDO RAMOS, ADORACION RAMOS, ERICSON
RAMOS,CAMILLERAMOS,RAMILMARQUISA,10ROMEO
PORCARE, NIDA PORCARE, JEROME PORCARE,
JONATHAN PORCARE, PILARCITA ABSIN, JHONJHON
ABSIN, JASON ABSIN,11 JAYSON ABSIN, EDWARDO
ABSIN, MAMRIA EDEN,12 ARNEL REUCAZA, ZENAIDA
REUCAZA, MICHELE REUCAZA, NALYN REUCAZA,13

petitionersfinancialsupportwhilerespondentlivedinMurillosapartmentandhisregularvisitstoher
atthesaidapartment,thoughrepletewithdetails,donotapproximatetheoverwhelmingevidence,
documentary and testimonial presented in Ilano. In that case, we sustained the appellate courts
rulinganchoredonthefollowingfactualfindingsbytheappellatecourtwhichwasquotedatlengthin
theponencia:

c h a n Ro b le s v ir t u a lL a wlib r a r y

ItwasArtemiowhomadearrangementforthedeliveryofMerceditas(sic)attheManila
SanitariumandHospital.Priortothedelivery,Leonciaunderwentprenatalexamination
accompaniedbyArtemio(TSN,p.33,5/17/74).Afterdelivery,theywenthometotheir
residenceatEDSAinacarownedanddrivenbyArtemiohimself(id.p.36).
Merceditas (sic) bore the surname of Ilano since birth without any objection on the
part of Artemio, the fact that since Merceditas (sic) had her discernment she had
alwaysknownandcalledArtemioasherDaddy(TSN,pp.2829,10/18/74)thefact
thateachtimeArtemiowasathome,hewouldplaywithMerceditas(sic),takeherfora
rideorrestaurantstoeat,andsometimessleepingwithMerceditas(sic)(id.p.34)and
does all what a father should do for his child bringing home goodies, candies, toys
andwhateverhecanbringherwhichachildenjoyswhichArtemiogivestoMerceditas
(sic) (TSN, pp. 3839, 5/17/74) are positive evidence that Merceditas (sic) is the child
ofArtemioandrecognizedbyArtemioassuch.SpecialattentioniscalledtoExh.E7
where Artemio was telling Leoncia the need for a frog test to know the status of
Leoncia.
Plaintiff pointed out that the support by Artemio for Leoncia and Merceditas (sic) was
sometimes in the form of cash personally delivered to her by Artemio, thru Melencio,
thruElynia(Exhs.E2andE3,andD6),orthruMerceditas(sic)herself(TSN,p.
40,5/17/74)andsometimesintheformofacheckastheManilaBankingCorporation
Check No. 81532 (Exh. G) and the signature appearing therein which was identified
by Leoncia as that of Artemio because Artemio often gives her checks and Artemio
wouldwritethecheckathomeandsawArtemiosignthecheck(TSN,p.49,7/18/73).
Both Artemio and Nilda admitted that the check and signature were those of Artemio
(TSN,p.53,10/17/77TSN,p.19,10/9/78).
DuringthetimethatArtemioandLeonciawerelivingashusbandandwife,Artemiohas
shownconcernasthefatherofMerceditas(sic).WhenMerceditas(sic)wasinGrade1
attheSt.JosephParochialSchool,ArtemiosignedtheReportCardofMerceditas(sic)
(Exh.H)forthefourthandfifthgradingperiod(s)(Exh.H1andH2)astheparent
of Merceditas (sic). Those signatures of Artemio [were] both identified by Leoncia and
Merceditas(sic)becauseArtemiosignedExh.H1andH2attheirresidenceinthe
presence of Leoncia, Merceditas (sic) and of Elynia (TSN, p. 57, 7/18/73 TSN, p. 28,
10/1/73).xxx.
xxxxxxxxx
When Artemio run as a candidate in the Provincial Board of Cavite[,] Artemio gave
Leonciahispicturewiththefollowingdedication:ToNene,withbestregards,Temiong.
(Exh.I).(pp.1920,AppellantsBrief)
The mere denial by defendant of his signature is not sufficient to offset the totality of
theevidenceindubitablyshowingthatthesignaturethereonbelongstohim.Theentry
in the Certificate of Live Birth that Leoncia and Artemio was falsely stated therein as
married does not mean that Leoncia is not appellees daughter. This particular entry
wascausedtobemadebyArtemiohimselfinordertoavoidembarrassment.39
In sum, we hold that the testimonies of respondent and Murillo, by themselves are not competent
proofofpaternityandthetotalityofrespondentsevidencefailedtoestablishChristianPaulosfiliation
topetitioner.
Time and again, this Court has ruled that a high standard of proof is required to establish paternity
and filiation. An order for recognition and support may create an unwholesome situation or may be
anirritanttothefamilyorthelivesofthepartiessothatitmustbeissuedonlyifpaternityorfiliation
isestablishedbyclearandconvincingevidence.40
Finally,wenotetheManifestationandMotion41 filed by petitioners counsel informing this Court that
petitionerhaddiedonMay6,2010.
The action for support having been filed in the trial court when petitioner was still alive, it is not
barredunderArticle175(2)42oftheFamilyCode.Wehavealsoheldthatthedeathoftheputative
fatherisnotabartotheactioncommencedduringhislifetimebyoneclaimingtobehisillegitimate
child.43 The rule on substitution of parties provided in Section 16, Rule 3 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure,thusapplies.
SEC.16.Deathofpartydutyofcounsel.Wheneverapartytoapendingactiondies,
andtheclaimisnottherebyextinguished,itshallbethedutyofhiscounseltoinform
the court within thirty (30) days after such death of the fact thereof, and to give the
name and address of his legal representative or representatives. Failure of counsel to
complywithhisdutyshallbeagroundfordisciplinaryaction.
The action must be brought within the same period specified in Article 173, except
when the action is based on the second paragraph of Article 172, in which case the
actionmaybebroughtduringthelifetimeoftheallegedparent.
Theheirsofthedeceasedmaybeallowedtobesubstitutedforthedeceased,without
requiringtheappointmentofanexecutororadministratorandthecourtmayappointa
guardianadlitemfortheminorheirs.
The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear
andbesubstitutedwithinaperiodofthirty(30)daysfromnotice.
Ifnolegalrepresentativeisnamedbythecounselforthedeceasedparty,oriftheone
so named shall fail to appear within the specified period, the court may order the
opposing party, within a specified time to procure the appointment of an executor or
administratorfortheestateofthedeceasedandthelattershallimmediatelyappearfor
and on behalf of the deceased. The court charges in procuring such appointment, if
defrayedbytheopposingparty,mayberecoveredascosts.
WHEREFORE, the petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED. The Decision dated July 18, 2006
andResolutiondatedOctober19,2007oftheCourtofAppealsinCAGR.CVNo.64379arehereby

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

5/9

4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE
MARICRIS REUCAZA, ABELLE REUCAZA,14 JHON
VILLAVECENCIO,
CILLE
VILLAVECENCIO,
ARIEL
CAHIBAYBAYAN, JOHN EDWARD VILLAVECENCIO,
ARCELITO VILLAVECENCIO, FERMINA RIVERA, ANITA
RIVERA,15 EDWIN HOSMILLO, ESTER HOSMILLO,
REGINE HOSMILLO, MARFIKIS VENZON, CURT SMITH
VENZON, ALBERTO VILLAVECENCIO, MARILYN DE
VEGA, JEFFREY DE VEGA, LIANA DE VEGA, RAMIL DE
VEGA,16 SHANE VENZON, RUFO SINGSON, ROSALIE
BALINGIT, RAUL SINGSON, HAZEL GARCIA, CRISTINE
GARCIA, JASON GARCIA, ECY B. TAN,17 GREGORIO
AURE, ICTORIA SARMIENTO,18 OSCAR TUBIGO,19
JOVY SARMIENTO, BABYLYN SARMIENTO, JEAN
CAHIBAYBAYAN,20 RONALD CAHIBAYBAYAN,21 ALLAN
CAHIBAYBAYAN, AMELIA DEQUINA, DENNIS DEQUINA,
IRMA DEQUINA, FREDERICK DEQUINA, CRISTINE JOY
DEQUINA, ENRIQUE LOPEZ,22 NERY LOPEZ, NERISSA
LOPEZ, ERICA LOPEZ, VANESSA LOPEZ, LEO JIMENEZ,
MICHELLE JIMENEZ, MAYLEEN JIMENEZ, LEONARDO
JIMENEZ,23 FELICIANO MIRALLES, VIRGINIA ECIJA,
LEONARDOAHORRO,MA.GINASORIO,ARNELSORIO,
JOENNY PAVILLAR, SALVACION PAVILLAR, JOHNNY
BALDERAMA, MARY JANE BALDERAMA, FERDINAND
MALAQUE, MARK ADELCHI MALAQUE, CLIO JOY
MALAQUE,
IRISH
MADLANGBAYAN,
EFFERSON
MADLANGBAYAN, ROBERTO MALAQUE, HELARIA
MALAQUE,24 ARBIE MAY MALAQUEROY,25 GILBERT
MALAQUE,26 SARRY LEGASPI, TERESITA LEGASPI,
ROSEANN CRUZ, SHE ANN CRUZ, EXELEN LEGASPI,
GREGORIO RAMOS, NENITA RAMOS, FELINO TEGIO,
JOYZAIRRA ACULA, JUANITO CALUGAY,27 GEMMA
CALUGAY, CARLITO ANTONIO, CELIA ANTONIO,28
PRINCES MARGARET,29 JOSE CECILIO,30 JEROME
CZAR,31 RAMON SISON, DANILO SISON, MARILOU
SISON, ALEX RIVERA, NARCISO DEL ROSARIO, BRIAN
DEL ROSARIO,32 CHARLINE DEL ROSARIO, CARMELA
DEL ROSARIO, KEVIN DEL ROSARIO, BEHNSIN JOHN
DEL PACIS,33 MELRON ANTONIO, ANGEO ANTONIO,34
DAISY ANN ANTONIO, IVAN ANTONIO, RAYMART
ANTONIO,
PRESCILLA
PAGKALIWANGAN,
MARK
KENNETH
PAGKALIWANGAN,
MARK
JULIUS
PAGKALIWANGAN,
VINCENT
PAGKALIWANGAN,
DOLORESORTEZA,JONECAORTEZA,35YUMIORTEZA,
NICANOR ORTEZA, RAUL BALINGIT, KATRINA
CASSANDRA BAES, CHRISTOPHER BAES, MARK GIL
BAES, BIENVENIDO BAES, ARTEMIO SANTOS,
CATHERINEUMINGA,ROLANDOUMINGA,SR.,ERLINDA
TUAZON,CHRISTIANTUAZON,ARGELANGELOSANTOS,
MONTANO PAGKALIWANGAN, IN THEIR OWN BEHALF
AND AS MEMBERS OF SAMAHANG MAGKAKAPITBAHAY
NG
VILLA
REYES
COMPOUND
ASSOCIATION,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 183804, September 11, 2013 S.C.
MEGAWORLD CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. ENGR. LUIS U. PARADA,
REPRESENTED BY ENGR. LEONARDO A. PARADA OF
GENLITEINDUSTRIES,Respondent.
G.R. Nos. 16982324, September 11, 2013
HERMINIO T. DISINI, Petitioner, v. THE HON.
SANDIGANBAYAN, FIRST DIVISION, AND THE PEOPLE
OFTHEPHILIPPINES,Respondents.G.R.Nos.174764
65, September 11, 2013 HERMINIO T. DISINI,
Petitioner, v. SANDIGANBAYAN, FIRST DIVISION, AND
THEPEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,Respondents.
G.R. No. 183952, September 09, 2013 CZARINA T.
MALVAR, Petitioner, v. KRAFT FOOD PHILS., INC.
AND/OR BIENVENIDO BAUTISTA, KRAFT FOODS
INTERNATIONAL,Respondents.
G.R. No. 201787, September 25, 2013 ANALITA P.
INOCENCIO, SUBSTITUTING FOR RAMON INOCENCIO
(DECEASED), Petitioner, v. HOSPICIO DE SAN JOSE,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 200080, September 18, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. MARVIN
CAYANAN,AccusedAppellant.

REVERSEDandSETASIDE. Civil Case No. 2124AF of the Regional Trial Court of Cabanatuan City,
Branch26isDISMISSED.
Nopronouncementastocosts.

c h a n Ro b le s v ir t u a lL a wlib r a r y

SOORDERED.
Sereno,C.J.,(Chairperson),LeonardoDeCastro,Bersamin,andReyes,JJ.,concur.
Endnotes:
1Rollo,

pp. 7584. Penned by Associate Justice Arcangelita.M. RomillaLontok with

AssociateJusticesRobertoA.BarriosandMarioL.GuariaIIIconcurring.
2 Id. at 93. Penned by Associate Justice Arcangelita M. RomillaLontok with Associate

JusticesMarioL.GuariaIIIandLucenitoN.Tagle.
3Records,pp.16.

5TSN,October6,1995,p.21TSN,November17,1995,pp.47,13TSN,March22,

1996,pp.1425TSN,June3,1996,pp.1929,3337.

6 Id. at 821 id. at 1012 id. at 711 id. at 910, 1418, 4346 TSN, February 19,

1996,pp.6,1012.

7TSN,July8,1996,pp.511TSN,November29,1996,pp.49,1526.
8Rollo,pp.6573.PennedbyActingPresidingJudgeJohnsonL.Ballutay.
10Id.at8283.
12Ang v. Ang, G.R. No. 186993, August 22, 2012, 678 SCRA 699, 705, citing Hyatt

Elevators and Escalators Corp. v. Goldstar Elevators, Phils., Inc., 510 Phil. 467, 476
(2005).
131997RULESOFCIVILPROCEDURE,Rule4,Section2.
14Angv.Ang, supra note 12, at 705706, citing Baritua v. Court of Appeals, 335 Phil.

12,1516(1997).

15Fernandezv.InternationalCorporateBank,374Phil.668,677(1999),citingRule14,

Section4ofthepre1997RulesofCourtwhichprovidesthat[w]henimpropervenueis
notobjectedtoinamotiontodismiss,itisdeemedwaived.TheComplaintinthiscase
wasfiledonMay26,1995andtheAnswerwasfiledonJuly3,1995.
16Records,pp.8183,109,111and113.
17Id.at115126,128and130.
18Id.at131138,140and142146.
19Gochanv.Gochan,446Phil.433,454(2003),citingTiomicov.CourtofAppeals,363

Phil.558,571(1999)PepsiColaProductsPhils,Inc.v.CourtofAppeals,359Phil.859,
867 (1998) Republic of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan, 361 Phil. 186, 196 (1999)
andIrigaTelephoneCo.,Inc.v.NLRC,350Phil.245,252(1998).
20Memita v. Masongsong, G.R. No. 150912, May 28, 2007, 523 SCRA 244, 254, citing

RockwellPerfectoGohuv.SpousesGohu,397Phil.126,135(2000).
21Supranote19.

22Id.at572,citingCingHongSov.TanBoonKong,53Phil.437(1929)andSuarez v.

CourtofAppeals,G.R.No.91133,March22,1993,220SCRA274,279.

23Memita v. Masongsong, supra note 20, at 253, citing Air Phils. Corp. v. International

Business Aviation Services Phils., Inc., 481 Phil. 366, 386 (2004) and Tiomico v. Court
ofAppeals,supranote19,at570571.
24Records,p.88.

G.R. No. 203068, September 18, 2013 PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. RYAN FRIAS Y
GALANGA.K.A.TAGADOG,AccusedAppellant.

25Cabataniav.CourtofAppeals,484Phil.42,51(2004).

G.R. No. 206987, September 10, 2013 ALLIANCE

FOR NATIONALISM AND DEMOCRACY (ANAD),
Petitioner,
v.
COMMISSION
ON
ELECTIONS,
Respondent.

ofManila,102Phil.1050,1054(1958).

G.R.No.202370,September23,2013JUANSEVILLA
SALAS, JR., Petitioner, v. EDEN VILLENA AGUILA,
Respondent.

28 See Nepomuceno v. Lopez, G.R. No. 181258, March 18, 2010, 616 SCRA 145, 153

G.R. No. 201103, September 25, 2013 PEOPLE OF

THEPHILIPPINES,PlaintiffAppellee,v.JIMMYCEDENIO
YPERALTA,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 197550, September 25, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. ARTURO
ENRIQUEZYDELOSREYES,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 198444, September 04, 2013 CITIBANK
N.A. AND THE CITIGROUP PRIVATE BANK, Petitioners,
v.ESTERH.TANCOGABALDON,ARSENIOTANCO&THE
HEIRS OF KU TIONG LAM, Respondents. G.R. No.
19846970, September 04, 2013 CAROL LIM,
Petitioner, v. ESTER H. TANCOGABALDON, ARSENIO
TANCO&THEHEIRSOFKUTIONGLAM,Respondents.

26Berciles,etal.v.GSIS,etal.,213Phil.48,71(1984)Rocesv.LocalCivilRegistrar

27Reyes, et al. v. Court of Appeals, et al., 220 Phil. 116, 128 (1985), citing Intestate

EstateofParejav.Pareja,95Phil.167,172(1954).

and Puno v. Puno Enterprises, Inc., G.R. No. 177066, September 11, 2009, 599 SCRA
585,590591.
29Records,p.90.

30Fernandez v. Fernandez, 416 Phil. 322, 339 (2001) Fernandez v. Court of Appeals,

G.R. No. 108366, February 16, 1994, 230 SCRA 130, 136 Reyes, et al. v. Court of
Appeals, et al., supra note 27 Macadangdang v. Court of Appeals, No. L49542,
September12,1980,100SCRA73,84.
31 Fernandez v. Court of Appeals, id. at 135136, citing Tan v. Trocio, A.C. No. 2115,

November271990,191SCRA764,769.
32Records,pp.103104.
33Id.at92.

G.R. No. 197522, September 11, 2013 ELISEO V.

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

6/9

4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE
AGUILAR,Petitioner,v.DEPARTMENTOFJUSTICE,PO1
LEO T. DANGUPON, 1ST LT. PHILIP FORTUNO, CPL.
EDILBERTO ABORDO, SPO3 GREGARDRO A. VILLAR,
SPO1 RAMON M. LARA, SPO1 ALEX L. ACAYLAR, AND
PO1JOVANNIEC.BALICOL,Respondents.
G.R. No. 158866, September 09, 2013 BANCO
FILIPINO SAVINGS AND MORTGAGE BANK, Petitioner,
v. TALA REALTY SERVICES CORPORATION, PEDRO B.
AGUIRRE, REMEDIOS A. DUPASQUIER, PILAR D.
ONGKING, ELIZABETH H. PALMA, DOLLY W. LIM,
RUBENCITO M. DEL MUNDO, ADD INTERNATIONAL
SERVICES, INCORPORATED, AND NANCY L. TY,
Respondents.G.R.No.181933,September09,2013
NANCY L. TY, Petitioner, v. BANCO FILIPINO SAVINGS
ANDMORTGAGEBANK,Respondent.G.R.No.187551,
September 09, 2013 BANCO FILIPINO SAVINGS AND
MORTGAGE BANK, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS,
TALA REALTY SERVICES CORPORATION, NANCY L. TY,
PEDROB.AGUIRRE,REMEDIOSA.DUPASQUIER,PILAR
D. ONGKING, ELIZABETH H. PALMA, DOLLY W. LIM,
RUBENCITOM.DELMUNDO,ANDADDINTERNATIONAL
SERVICES,INCORPORATED,Respondents.
B.M.No.2540,September24,2013INRE:PETITION
TO SIGN IN THE ROLL OF ATTORNEYS MICHAEL A.
MEDADO,Petitioner.
G.R. No. 171633, September 18, 2013 JUANITO
VICTORC.REMULLA,Petitioner,v.ERINEOS.MALIKSI,
INHISCAPACITYASGOVERNOROFTHEPROVINCEOF
CAVITE, RENATO A. IGNACIO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS
PROVINCIAL LEGAL OFFICER OF THE PROVINCE OF
CAVITE, MARIETTA O'HARA DE VILLA, HEIRS OF
HIGINO DE VILLA, GOLDENROD, INC., SONYA G.
MATHAY,ANDELEUTERIOM.PASCUAL,Respondents.

34Id.at93102.
35Nepomucenov.Lopez,supranote28.
36G.R.No.112229,March18,1997,270SCRA1,57.
37G.R.No.104376,February23,1994,230SCRA242.
38 Gotardo v. Buling, G.R. No. 165166, August 15, 2012, 678 SCRA 436, 443, citing

Cruz v. Cristobal, 529 Phil. 695, 710711 (2006), Heirs of Ignacio Conti v. Court of
Appeals,360Phil.536,548549(1998)andTrinidad v. Court of Appeals, 352 Phil. 12,
3233(1998)Uyguangcov.CourtofAppeals,258APhil.467,472473(1989).
39Supranote37,at255256.
40Cabatania v. Court of Appeals, supra note 25, at 50, citing Baluyut v. Baluyut, G.R.

No. 33659, June 14, 1990, 186 SCRA 506, 513 and Constantino v. Mendez, G.R. No.
57227,May14,1992,209SCRA18,2324.
41Rollo,pp.212213.
42ART.175.xxx
43Mendoza

v. Court of Appeals, 278 Phil. 687, 694 (1991), citing Masecampo v.

Masecampo,11Phil.1,3(1908).

G.R.No.171206,September23,2013HEIRSOFTHE
LATE SPOUSES FLAVIANO MAGLASANG AND SALUD
ADAZAMAGLASANG, NAMELY, OSCAR A. MAGLASANG,
EDGAR A. MAGLASANG, CONCEPCION CHONA A.
MAGLASANG, GLENDA A. MAGLASANGARNAIZ, LERMA
A. MAGLASANG, FELMA A. MAGLASANG, FE DORIS A.
MAGLASANG, LEOLINO A. MAGLASANG, MARGIE LEILA
A. MAGLASANG, MA. MILALIE A. MAGLASANG, SALUD
MAGLASANG, AND MA. FLASALIE A. MAGLASANG,
REPRESENTINGTHEESTATESOFTHEIRAFORENAMED
DECEASED PARENTS, Petitioners, v. MANILA BANKING
CORPORAT ON, NOW SUBSTITUTED BY FIRST
SOVEREIGN ASSET MANAGEMENT [SPVAMC], INC.
[FSAMI],Respondent.
G.R. Nos. 19501119, September 30, 2013
GREGORIO
SINGIAN,
JR.,
Petitioner,
v.
SANDIGANBAYAN(3RDDIVISION),THEPEOPLEOFTHE
PHILIPPINES,ANDTHEPRESIDENTIALCOMMISSIONON
GOODGOVERNMENT,Respondents.
G.R. No. 180427, September 30, 2013 CRISANTA
GUIDOENRIQUEZ,Petitioner,v.ALICIAI.VICTORINO,
HEIRS OF ANTONIA VDA. DE VICTORINO, AND HON.
RANDY A. RUTAQUIO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS ACTING
REGISTEROFDEEDSOFRIZALFORMORONGBRANCH,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 179259, September 25, 2013
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v.
PHILIPPINEAIRLINES,INC.(PAL),Respondent.
G.R.No.204603,September24,2013REPUBLICOF
THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY, THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, THE
SECRETARYOFFOREIGNAFFAIRS,THESECRETARYOF
NATIONAL DEFENSE, THE SECRETARY OF THE
INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT THE SECRETARY
OF FINANCE, THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, THE
SECRETARY OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT THE
TREASURER. OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE CHIEF OF
STAFF OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES,
ANDTHECHIEFOFTHEPHILIPPINENATIONALPOLICE,
Petitioners, v. HERMINIO HARRY ROQUE, MORO
CHRISTIAN PEOPLE'S ALLIANCE, FR. JOE DIZON,
RODINIE SORIANO, STEPHANIE ABIERA, MARIA
LOURDES ALCAIN, VOLTAIRE ALFEREZ, CZARINA MAY
ALTEZ, SHERYL BALOT, RENIZZA BATACAN, EDAN
MARRICANETE,LEANACARAMOAN,ALDWINCAMANCE,
RENE DELORINO, PAULYN MAY DUMAN, RODRIGO
FAJARDO III, ANNA MARIE GO, ANNA ARMINDA
JIMENEZ,MARYANNLEE,LUISAMANALAYSAY,MIGUEL
MUSNGI, MICHAEL OCAMPO, NORMAN ROLAND OCANA
III,WILLIAMRAGAMAT,MARICARRAMOS,CHERRYLOU
REYES, MELISSA ANN SICAT, CRISTINE MAE TABING,
VANESSA TORNO, AND HON. JUDGE ELEUTERIO L.
BATHAN, AS PRESIDING JUDGE OF REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT,QUEZONCITY,BRANCH92,Respondents.

BacktoHome|BacktoMain

QUICKSEARCH

1901

1902

1903

1904

1905

1906

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

1915

1916

1917

1918

1919

1920

1921

1922

1923

1924

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

1934

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

1940

1941

1942

1943

1944

1945

1946

1947

1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

1957

1958

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2013

2014

2015

2016

2012

MainIndicesoftheLibrary>

Go!

G.R. No. 192253, September 18, 2013 PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. CARLITO
ESPENILLA,AccusedAppellant.
G.R.No.187378,September30,2013RAMONITOO.
ACAAC, PETAL FOUNDATION, INC., APOLINARIO M.
ELORDE, HECTOR ACAAC, AND ROMEO BULAWIN,
Petitioners, v. MELQUIADES D. AZCUNA, JR., IN HIS
CAPACITY AS MAYOR, AND MARIETES B. BONALOS, IN
HERCAPACITYASMUNICIPALENGINEERANDBUILDING
OFFICIALDESIGNATE, BOTH OF LOPEZ JAENA
MUNICIPALITY,MISAMISOCCIDENTAL,Respondents.
G.R. No. 197813, September 25, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. EDWIN IBAEZ

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

7/9

4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE
YALBANTEANDALFREDO(FREDDIE)NULLAYIBAEZ,
AccusedAppellants.
G.R. No. 202158, September 25, 2013 ERIC
ALVAREZ, SUBSTITUTED BY ELIZABETH ALVAREZ
CASAREJOS,Petitioner,v.GOLDENTRIBLOC,INC.AND
ENRIQUELEE,Respondents.
G.R. No. 185383, September 25, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. GIOVANNI
OCFEMIAYCHAVEZ,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 191256, September 18, 2013 PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. GARY ALINAO,
AccusedAppellant.
G.R.No.180064,September16,2013JOSEU.PUA
AND BENJAMIN HANBEN U. PUA, Petitioners, v.
CITIBANK,N.A.,Respondent.
G.R. No. 187268, September 04, 2013 JOVITO C.
PLAMERAS,Petitioner,v.PEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 166330, September 11, 2013 SMART
COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Petitioner, v. ARSENIO
ALDECOA, JOSE B. TORRE, CONRADO U. PUA,
GREGORIOV.MANSANO,JERRYCORPUZANDESTELITA
ACOSTA,Respondents.
A.M. No. P133105 (Formerly A.M. No. 10783
MTCC), September 11, 2013 OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. DESIDERIO W.
MACUSI, JR., SHERIFF IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT,
BRANCH25,TABUKCITY,KALINGA,Respondent.
A.C. No. 9684, September 18, 2013 MARY ROSE A.
BOTO, Complainant, v. SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY
PROSECUTORVINCENTL.VILLENA,CITYPROSECUTOR
ARCHIMEDES V. MANABAT AND ASSISTANT CITY
PROSECUTORPATRICKNOELP.DEDIOS,Respondents.
G.R. No. 201760, September 16, 2013 LBL
INDUSTRIES, INC., Petitioner, v. CITY OF LAPULAPU,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 195395, September 10, 2013 ENGINEER
MANOLITOP.MENDOZA,Petitioner,v.COMMISSIONON
AUDIT,Respondent.
G.R. No. 180284, September 11, 2013 NARCISO
SALAS, Petitioners, v. ANNABELLE MATUSALEM,
Respondent.

|Disclaimer|EmailRestrictions

Copyright19982016ChanRoblesPublishingCompany

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

RED

8/9

4/18/2016 G.R.No.180284,September11,2013NARCISOSALAS,Petitioners,v.ANNABELLEMATUSALEM,Respondent.:SEPTEMBER2013PHILIPPINE
ChanRobles VirtualLawLibrary |chanrobles.com

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013septemberdecisions.php?id=846

9/9