Republic of the Philippines

__th MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT

___________________
_______________
Province of Cebu

JUAN ILOK,
Plaintiff,
Procedure

Civil Case No. ____

For:
Summary

-versusBRAD ARMPIT,
Defendant.
x------------------------------------------------x

POSITION PAPER
(FOR THE DEFENDANT)
DEFENDANT, through counsel, to the Honorable
Court, respectfully submit this Position Paper in support of
the arguments in the Answer and the documentary
evidence attached therewith, thus:
PREFATORY STATEMENT
This is a Summary Procedure case.

FACTUAL
ANTECEDENTS
Defendant, a resident of Pardo, Cebu City borrowed
P150,000 from the plaintiff last March 07, 2007.
Defendant promised to pay the said obligation to the
plaintiff by July 31, 2007. On July 20, 2007, defendant
went to the plaintiffs house to initially pay P50,000 which

was received by John, the plaintiffs son, because Juan

was out of the house at that point in time. John received
the P50,000 from the defendant. John did not issue any
receipt at all. Come July 31, 2007, the defendant brought
with him the P100,000 to pay off the obligation also
informing the plaintiff of the initial payment of P50,000 to
John. The defendant thus realized that the P50,000 was
never given to the plaintiff but also arguing that the
responsibility to recover the P50,000 was the burden of
the plaintiff since it is his son who received the initial
payment.
The issue raised during the preliminary conference:
Defendant argues that the said unpaid balance was
already paid and there is no obligation on the part of the
defendant to repay the plaintiff despite the averments of
the plaintiff that the said payment was never remitted by
the latters son.

NATURE OF AN ACTION FOR SUMMARY

PROCEDURE
THE 1991 REVISED RULES ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE
Pursuant to section 36 of the Judiciary Reorganization Act
of 1980 (B.P. Blg. 129) and to achieve an expeditious and
inexpensive determination of the cases referred to herein,
the Court resolved to promulgate the following Revised
Rules on Summary Procedure:
I. APPLICABILITY
SECTION 1. Scope- This rule shall govern the summary
procedure in the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
Courts in Cities, Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, and
Municipal Trial Courts in the following cases falling within
their jurisdiction:
A. Civil Cases
(1) All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer,
irrespective of the amount of damages and unpaid rentals
sought to be recovered. Where attorneys fees are
awarded, the same shall not exceed 20,000.00

(2) All other cases, except probate proceedings, where

the total amount of plaintiffs claim does not exceed
100,000.00 or 200,000.00 in Metro Manila, exclusive of
interests and costs. (As amended by A.M. 02-11-09-SC, effective
November 25, 2002)

Rules in Summary Procedure is applicable in the

present case due to a plaintiffs claim of not exceeding
100,000, P50,000 to be exact.
Basic is the rule that what determines the nature of
the action and what court has jurisdiction over it are the
averments or allegations in the complaint and the
character of the remedy or relief sought.

DEFENDANTS POSITION AND ARGUMENTS

Defendant argues that the said unpaid balance of
P50,000 was already paid and there is no obligation on
the part of the defendant to repay the plaintiff despite the
averments of the plaintiff that the said payment was
never remitted by the latters son.
THE PLAINTIFFS ARE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES
Defendants reputation in the community had been
tainted by reason of the plaintiffs baseless or unfounded
allegations. Thus, defendants are liable for moral
damages.
In the interest of public good and to dissuade others
from filing a similar complaint, plaintiffs should pay
exemplary damages.
Since defendants were compelled to secure the
services of a lawyer to protect their rights and interests,
plaintiffs should be ordered to pay the attorneys fee and
honorarium per court appearance incurred by the
defendants in the case at bar.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, on the basis of all the foregoing, it is
respectfully prayed that this position paper be given due

consideration in the resolution of this case and that

judgment be rendered in favor of the
defendant by DISMISSING the complaint for lack of merit,
and to award the defendant damages in such amount as
the court may deem reasonable.
Other reliefs that are just and equitable under the
premises are likewise prayed for.
Cebu City for ________, Cebu, August 22, 2016.

Defendant

ATTY. ________________
Counsel for the
Qimonda.,
City of Cebu,

Cebu

Roll No. 46359

PTR No. PGI ________________
IBP
Receipt
No.
___________________
MCLE Compliance No.
____________
Valid from
__________ until ________
MCLE Compliance No.
___________
Valid from ________, 2016 to
_______, 2019
E-mail Add: _________________

RODERICK M CRUZ