You are on page 1of 13

FOR July 8, 2017 (Remedial Law Review 1, Fifth year MU)

1. What shall the court do if it finds that the requisites of a class suit have been met?[1] The court shall appoint a number of the
group which It finds sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully protect the interests of all concerned to sue or defend for the
benefit of the group.

2. May a group member who was not appointed as a representative intervene in the suit?[2] Yes. Any party in interest shall have
the right to intervene to protect his individual interest.

3. Spouses H and W, during their lifetime, acquired a parcel of land in 1985, located in Cogon, Lala, Lanao del Norte, under PD
27, or the Agrarian Law at that time, and subsequently an Emancipation Patent was issued to them in the same year. H died in 1986
while W died in 1987. A, B, C, D and E were the spouses surviving heirs. In 1989, A, the eldest of the five siblings, mortgaged the
land to F but it was not redeemed. Subsequently, A executed a deed of sale in favor of F, without the knowledge of the other four
siblings. The land has an assessed value of P30,000.00. After learning of the sale, B and C agreed to institute and action to recover
ownership of the land but D and E did not want to join with them. (a) What will B and C first do before they file an action in Court?
[3] Explain. (b) Let us assume that they already complied the requirements in accordance to your answer in question (a), what will B
and C do next?[4] Explain. (c) Do you think the action of B and C to recover ownership of the land from A and F will prosper
considering that the land was not yet partitioned by among the siblings?[5] Explain. (d) What will B and C do as far as D and E who
do not want to be included in the suit?[6] Explain.

4. N Magazine published an article titled An island of fear which wrote all alleged abuses committed by sugarcane plantation
owners against their workers. The sugarcane planters filed a class suit for libel and damages against N. Was the filing of a class suit
proper?[7] Explain. No. Each sugarcane planter has a separate and distinct reputation in the community; hence the subject matter
of the controversy and not merely in the legal question involved.

5. If a class suit is not proper, what is the recourse of the defendant?[8] Explain. The defendant can file a motion to dismiss on the
ground that the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue. The reason is that a class suit not being proper, the plaintiff or plaintiffs has or
have no right to sue for the benefit of the class.

6. L, in Cebu, sold a quantity of rice for P20,000 to R in Toledo, and shipped the rice through C Transportation. R refused to pay L,
claiming that the rice was never delivered to him. C, on the other hand, claimed that it has delivered the rice to R. whom should L
sue?[9] Explain. L should sue both R and C. Under S13R3 of the Rules of Court, where the plaintiff is uncertain against who of
several persons he is entitled to relief, he may join any or all of them as defendants in the alternative, although a right to relief
against one may be inconsistent with a right to relief against the other. Here L is uncertain as to who between R and C is liable to
him. Hence he can sue both as alternative defendants. L should sue both R and C transportation. Under S13 R3 of the Rules of
Court, where the plaintiff is uncertain against who of several persons he is entitled to relief, he may join any or all of them as
defendants in the alternative, although a right to relief against one may be inconsistent with a right to relief against the other. Here L
is uncertain as to whom between R and C Transportation is liable to him. Hence he can sue both as alternative defendants.

7. May a defendant whose name or identity is unknown be sued?[10] Explain. Yes. Whenever the identity or name of the
defendant is unknown, he may be sued as the unknown owner, heir, devisee, or by such other designation as the case may require.
However when his identity or true name is discovered, the pleading must be amended accordingly (S14R3)

8. May an entity without juridical personality sue as a plaintiff?[11] Explain. No. Under S1R3 only natural or juridical persons or
entities authorized by law may be parties in a civil action.

9. May an entity without juridical personality be sued as a defendant?[12] Explain. Yes when it has entered into a transaction with
the plaintiff.

10. In the complaint, is it necessary to state the names of the persons composing the entity?[13] Explain. No. They may be sued
under the name by which they are generally or commonly known. However in the answer of such defendant, the names and
addresses of the persons composing said entity must all be revealed.

11. What is the duty of a partys counsel, in case of the death of the party?[14] Explain. If a party to a pending action dies and the
claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall be the duty of his counsel: (1) to inform the court within 30 days after such death of the fact
thereof, and (2) to give the name and address of his legal representative or representatives. Failure of counsel to comply with this
duty shall be a ground for disciplinary action.

12. When would the death of the party in a pending action extinguish the claim?[15] The general rule is that a persons rights and
obligations are transmissible upon his death to his heirs. However, when the rights and obligations of a party are intransmissible by
law or by stipulation or are purely personal, the partys death would result in the extinguishment of a claim. Examples are the right to
hold public office, the right to exercise a profession or vocation, rights and obligations arising from agency, and a right of a
usufructuary. The question as to whether the action survives or not depends on the nature of the action and the damaged sued for.
In the causes of action which survive, the wrong complained of affects primarily and principally property rights, the injuries to the
person being merely incidental, while in the causes of action which do not survive, the injury complained of is to the person, the
property and rights of property being affected being incidental.

13. P filed an action against D, who he alleges to be his father, to claim the status of the legitimate child. During the pendency of the
case, P died. May the heirs of P be substituted in the action?[16] Explain. Yes. Under Article 173 of the Family Code, the action to
claim legitimacy already commenced by the child shall survive notwithstanding the death of either or both of the parties. This action
is among those that survive under the Revised Rules of Court.

14. Does the duty under S16R3 apply to death of a party in cases pending appeal?[17] Explain. Yes.

15. What is the purpose of notifying or informing the court of the death of a party?[18] So that the court may forthwith order the
named legal representative(s) to appear and be substituted for the deceased party within a period of 30 days from notice.

16. Who is the legal representative of the deceased party?[19] The executor or administrator appointed by the probate court, or if
none, the heirs of the deceased.
17. If a party becomes incompetent or incapacitated, what will the court do?[20] The court, upon motion with notice, may allow the
action to be continued by or against the incompetent or incapacitated person assisted by his legal guardian or guardian ad litem who
is his legal representative.

18. In case of any transfer of interest, how the action may proceed?[21] Explain. The action may be continued by or against the
original party, unless the court upon motion directs the person to whom the interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or
joined with the original party.

19. What if there is no executor of administrator appointed by the probate court?[22] Explain. The court may appoint a guardian ad
litem for the minor heirs

20. What if no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased party, or if the one so named shall fail to appear within
the specified period?[23] Explain. The court may order the opposing party, within a specified time, to procure the appointment of an
executor or administrator for the estate of the deceased and the latter shall immediately appear for and on behalf of the deceased.
The court charges in procuring such appointment, if defrayed by the opposing party, may be recovered as costs.

21. L executed a will naming O as one of the devisees. Upon Ls death a petition for the probate of his will was filed with the RTC.
During the pendency of the probate proceedings, O died intestate. The Q law firm entered its appearance as counsel for F, who
claimed to be one of the heirs of O and their representative. The probate court allowed the appearance of the counsel and the
substitution of O by F, who had been designated by the other heirs as their representative in the probate court. E opposed the
appearance and the substitution on the ground that under Lawas v. CA, 143 SCRA 173 (1986), priority is given to the legal
representative of the deceased, (e.i. the executor or administrator, or in case where the heirs resort to an extrajudicial settlement of
the estate that the court may adopt the alternative of allowing the heirs to be substituted for the deceased. Was the substitution of
the deceased O by F proper?[24] Explain. Yes. The second paragraph of S16R3 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure is quite clear
that the heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for the deceased without requiring the appointment of an executor
or administrator. Hence the pronouncement in Lawas that priority should be given to the deceaseds legal representative in
substitution is no longer good case law.

22. P filed an action to recover possession and ownership of a parcel of land against D. During the pendency of the case P died but
no substitution by his heirs was effected. The trial court ruled in favor of P. D assert that the RTCs decision was invalid for lack of
jurisdiction, since the heirs were not substituted for the deceased P. Ps heirs, however, participated in the trial without being
substituted. Was the trial courts decision valid?[25] Explain. Yes. Notwithstanding the general rule in S16R3, a formal substitution of
heirs is not necessary when they themselves voluntarily appear, participate in the case, and present evidence in behalf of the
deceased. Strictly speaking, the rule on the substitution of heirs is not matter of jurisdiction but a requirement of due process. Thus
when due process is not violated, as when the right of the representative is recognized and protected, non-compliance or belated
compliance with the Rules cannot affect the validity of a promulgated decision. Mere failure to substitute for a deceased plaintiff is
not a sufficient ground to nullify a trial courts decision. The alleging party must prove that there was undeniable violation of due
process.

23. P filed an action to recover possession of a parcel of land against D. During the pendency of the case, D died. P advised the
court of Ds death and filed a motion for substitution but the court did not issue an order for the substitution of D. The heirs
possessed the land. Judgment was rendered in favor of P. May P enforce the judgment against the heirs?[26] Explain. No. The
failure to substitute the heirs for the deceased defendant deprived the court of jurisdiction to enforce its decision against them. The
rights of the heirs of D to due process were violated when they were not given the chance to defend their side in court. Hence the
judgment cannot be enforced against the heirs of D.

24. In the preceding problem, would your answer be the same if the heirs voluntarily appeared in court and participated in the
proceedings therein?[27] Explain. No, my answer would not be the same. The voluntary appearance of the heirs and their
participation in the proceedings therein cured the defect of lack of substitution. After all the heirs were now given their day in court.

25. P filed an action to recover possession of parcel of land against D. During the pendency of the case, D died. Ds counsel failed
to inform the court of Ds death. The heirs possessed the land. Judgment was rendered in favor of P. May P enforce the judgment
against the heirs?[28] Explain. Yes. Here Ds counsel failed to inform the court of his clients death. Since the trial court was not
informed of petitioners death, it may not be faulted for proceeding to render judgment without ordering his substitution. Its judgment
is thus valid and binding upon Ds legal representatives or successor-in-interest, insofar as his interest in the property subject of the
action is concerned.

26. P filed an action for quieting of title with damages against D. During the pendency of the case, a notice of hearing sent to D was
returned with the notation party-deceased. Ds counsel still continued to appear for D and did not inform the court of Ds death.
Judgment was rendered in favor of P ordering D to vacate the land and return possession to P. The heirs of D, who are now in
possession, contend that the judgment was void since there was no substitution. Are they correct?[29] Explain. No. The duty of the
court to order the legal representative to appear arises only upon proper notice. The notation Party-Deceased on the unserved
notices could not be the proper notice contemplated by the rule. As the trial court could not be expected to know or take judicial
notice of the death of the party without the proper manifestation from counsel, the trial court was well within its jurisdiction to
proceed as it did with the case. Moreover, there is no showing that the court proceedings were tainted with irregularity. It is the duty
of the counsel for the deceased to inform the court of the death of his client. The failure of counsel to fulfill his duty under Section 16
to inform the court of the death of his client and the non-substitution of such party will not invalidate the proceedings and the
judgment thereon if the action survives the death of such party. The decision rendered shall bind the partys successor-in-interest.
The rules operate on the presumption that the attorney of the deceased party is in a better position than the attorney for the adverse
party to know about the death of his client and to inform the court of the name and address of his legal representative.

27. A filed a complaint for the recovery of ownership of land against B who was represented by her counsel X. In the course of the
trial, B died. However, X failed to notify the court of Bs death. The court proceeded to hear the case and rendered judgment against
B. After judgment became final, a writ of execution was issued against C, who being Bs sole heir, acquired the property. (1) If you
were counsel of C, what course of action would you take?[30] Explain. If I were the counsel of C, I would file a motion to set aside
the writ of execution. The SC has held that the failure to substitute the heirs for the deceased defendant deprived the court of
jurisdiction to enforce its decision against them as their rights to due process were violated. (2) Did the failure of X to inform the
court of Bs death constitute direct contempt?[31] Explain. No. Direct contempt is misbehavior in the presence of or so near a court
as to obstruct or interrupt the proceedings before the same. Here the failure to notify the court was not a misbehavior in the
presence of or so near a court as to obstruct or interrupt the proceedings. The misbehavior would however amount to indirect
contempt as it was a misbehavior of an officer of the court in the performance of his official duties.
28. P filed an action for recovery of a parcel of land against D. The trial court dismissed the case prompting P to appeal to the CA.
Pending appeal, P died. The lawyer of P gave notice to the CA of Ps death and moved for the suspension of the period to file
appellants brief pending the appointment of an administrator of Ps estate in the probate proceedings. The CA denied the motion for
suspension and dismissed Ps appeal for failure to file the appellants brief. Was the CA correct?[32] Explain. No. The death of P
extinguished the lawyer-client relationship and hence the lawyer had no more authority to act in the case saves to notify the court
and give the names and addresses of the legal representative. The CA should have suspended the period to file the appellants brief
until a legal representative was appointed and the order of substitution made.

29. What is the Rule in case a party becomes incompetent or incapacitated?[33] Explain. If a party becomes incompetent or
incapacitated, the court, upon motion with notice, may allow the action to be continued by or against the incompetent or
incapacitated person assisted by his legal guardian or guardian ad litem.

30. What is the effect of a transfer of interest during the pendency of the litigation?[34] Explain. The action may be continued by or
against the original party, unless the court upon motion directs the transferee to be substituted in the action or joined with the
original party.

31. P filed with the RTC an action to collect a loan of P500,000 from D. P was able to obtain a writ of attachment and attached a
property of D. During the pendency of the case, D died. (a) Should the case be dismissed?[35] Explain. No, the case should be
allowed to continue until final judgment. S20R3 provides that when the action is for the recovery of money arising from contract,
express or implied, and the defendant dies before entry of final judgment, the action shall not be dismissed but shall instead be
allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. D should be substituted by his legal representative or heir. (b) D was substituted by
his heir X. P won the case and no appeal was made by X. May P move for the execution of the judgment against X?[36] Explain.
No. S20R3 provides that the judgment should be enforced in the manner especially provided in the Rules for prosecuting claims
against the estate of a deceased person. P should file the judgment award in the proceedings for the settlement of the estate of D
as a money claim pursuant to R86. (c) P filed the judgment as a money claim with the probate court. Does the writ of attachment
entitle P to preference over the other creditors in respect of the property attached?[37] Explain. Yes. The writ of attachment was not
dissolved since the main action was not dismissed but continues until final judgment. Hence P is preferred creditor over the property
attached.

32. P filed with the RTC an action for recovery of possession of a parcel of land against D. D died while the case was pending and
was substituted by his heir X who had succeeded D in the possession of the land. P won the case and no appeal was made by X.
May P move for the execution of the judgment against X?[38] Explain. Yes since this is not among the cases provided for in S5R86
which have to be filed with the probate court as a money claim. The judgment may be enforced against X since he had been validly
substituted for D.

33. P filed an action for tort against D who had negligently inflicted injuries upon P. D died during the pendency of the case and was
substituted by his heir X. Judgment was rendered in favor of P for P500,000. No appeal was filed by X. May P move for the
execution of the judgment against X?[39] Explain. No. This is a judgment for money against the decedent and hence has to be filed
with the probate court pursuant to S5R86.

34. P filed a complaint for sum of money against D. During the pendency of the case, D died. Intestate proceedings for the
settlement of the Ds estate commenced and notice to the estates creditors was given for them to file their claim within six months
from the first publication of the notice. A month thereafter, on Ps motion, the administrator of Ds estate was substituted for D in the
civil case for collection. The court rendered judgment in favor of P and Ds administrator appealed. P filed a contingent claim
covering the judgment award in the probate court. At the time of the filing of the contingent claim, the 6-month period for creditors to
file their claim had expired. In due course the judgment in favor of P was affirmed on appeal and became final and thus P moved
that the estate be ordered to pay P. The administrator opposed the motion on the ground that the claim is time-barred since the
contingent claim was filed beyond the statute of non-claims. Is the claim of P time-barred?[40] Explain. No. Where the deceased
was substituted by the administrator in the civil action involving money claim, the estate is deemed to have notice of such claim. The
substitution of the deceased in the civil action by the administrator or the decedents representative is generally considered as
equivalent to the presentation of the claim with the probate court. Under the circumstances, the filing of the contingent claim ad
abundantiurem cautelam by P was a mere formality.

35. (a) P sued to recover an unpaid loan and was awarded P333,000 by the RTC of Manila. D did not appeal within the period
allowed by law. He died six days after the lapse of the period. Forthwith, a petition for the settlement of his estate was properly filed
in the RTC of Pampanga where an inventory of his assets was filed and correspondingly approved. Thereafter, P filed a motion for
execution with the Manila court, contending therein that the motion was legally justified because the defendant died after the
judgment in the Manila court had become final. Resolve the motion.[41] I would deny the motion for execution. Under the Rules on
Special Proceedings, a judgment for money against the decedent must be filed with the probate court as a money claim to be
enforced in the manner provided for in R86. Hence the judgment cannot be enforced by execution. (b) Under the same facts as (a),
a writ of execution was issued by the Manila RTC upon proper motion three days after the lapse of the period to appeal. The
corresponding levy on execution was duly effected on defendants parcel of land worth P666,000 a day before the defendant died.
Would it be proper, on motion, to lift the levy on Ds property?[42] State the reasons for your answer. No, it would not be proper to lift
the levy on defendants property. Under the Rules on Civil Procedure, in case of the death of the judgment obligor after execution is
actually levied upon any of his property, the same may be sold for the satisfaction of the judgment obligation.

36. Spouses B and C were the owners of a residential and boarding house with a market value of more than P300,000. Their total
earnings were more than double the minimum wage of an employee. When the city demolished their residence and boarding house,
B and C filed an action for damages with the RTC against the city. They applied for exemption from the docket and legal fees as
indigents. They are disqualified to litigate as indigents since they have not met the salary and property requirements under
S19R141. May B and C still be exempted from paying the docket and legal fees as pauper litigants even though they do not meet
the requirements under S19R141?[43] Explain. Yes. B and C may still be exempted if they can prove that they have no money or
property sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic necessities for themselves and their family as provided in S21R3. If the
applicant for exemption meets the salary and property requirements under S19R141, then the grant of exemption is mandatory. On
the other hand when the applicant does not satisfy one or both requirements, then the applicant should not be denied outright;
instead the court should apply the indigency test under S21R3 and use its sound discretion in determining the merits of the
application for exemption.

37. What is the Rule in case of death or separation of a party who is a public officer?[44] Explain. When a public officer is a party
in an action in his official capacity and during its pendency dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office, the action may be
continued and maintained by or against his successor if, within thirty (30) days after the successor takes office or such time as may
be granted by the court, it is satisfactorily shown to the court by any party that there is a substantial need for continuing or
maintaining it and that the successor adopts or continues or threatens to adopt or continue to adopt or continue the action of his
predecessor. Before a substitution is made, the party or officer to be affected, unless expressly assenting thereto, shall be given
reasonable notice of the application therefor and accorded an opportunity to be heard.

38. What is the Rule when an action involves the validity of any treaty, law, ordinance, executive order, presidential decree, rules or
regulations?[45] Explain. In any action involving the validity of any treaty, law, ordinance, executive order, presidential decree, rules
or regulations, the court, in its discretion, may require the appearance of the Solicitor General who may be heard in person or a
representative duly designated by him.

39. Define venue.[46] Venue refers to the possible or proper place or places for the trial of a suit, as among several places where
jurisdiction could be established.

40. What is the difference between jurisdiction and venue?[47] Jurisdiction deals with the authority of the court to exercise judicial
power, while venue deals with the place where that power should be exercised.

41. Is venue jurisdictional?[48] In civil cases, venue is not jurisdictional. However in criminal cases, it is.

42. Distinguish real action from personal action.[49] A real action is an action affecting title to or possession of real property or
interest therein. Any other action is a personal action.

43. What is the venue of real action?[50] Real actions shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over
the areas wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer actions shall be
commenced and tried in the municipal trial court of the municipality or city wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof is
situated.

44. What is the venue of personal actions?[51] Personal actions may be commenced and tried where the plaintiffs or any of the
principal plaintiffs resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal defendants resides at the election of the plaintiff. In the
case of a non-resident defendant, the action may be commenced and tried where the plaintiff resides or where the non-resident
defendant may be found, at the election of the plaintiff. If the non-resident defendant is not found in the Philippines and the action
affects the personal status of the plaintiff, or any property of said defendant located in the Philippines, the action may be
commenced and tried in the court of the place where the plaintiff resides, or where the property or any portion thereof is situated or
found.

45. In what instances that the Rule on venue would not be applicable?[52] Explain. (a) In those cases where a specific rule or law
provides otherwise; or (b) Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the exclusive venue
thereof.

46. Gary who lived in Taguig borrowed P1 million from Rey who lived in Makati under a contract of loan that fixed Makati as the
venue of any action arising from the contract. Gary had already paid the loan but Rey kept on sending him letters of demand for
some balance. Where is the venue of the action for harassment that Gary wants to file against Rey?[53] (A) In Makati since the
intent of the party is to make it the venue of any action between them whether based on the contract or not. (B) In Taguig or Makati
at the option of Gary since it is a personal injury action. (C) In Taguig since Rey received the letters of demand there. (D) In Makati
since it is the venue fixed in their contract.

47. For purposes of the Rule on venue, what is the residence of a corporation?[54] Explain. The residence of a corporation is its
principal place of business, not its branch office.

48. D, an American citizen, borrowed P500,000 from P, a Filipino citizen while vacationing in the Philippines. D failed to pay. D went
to the U.S. May P file a suit against D?[55] Explain. No. D is a non- resident and he is not found in the Philippines. Nor does the
action affect Ps personal status or any property of D located in the Philippines. A Philippine court cannot acquire jurisdiction over a
non-resident defendant in an action in personam.

49. P filed an action with the RTC of Bulacan, where he resides, against M and F for the dissolution of their partnership. The main
asset of the partnership was a fishpond located in Marinduque. M and F filed an answer in which they alleged that the partnership
had so far been unproductive and that this was the result of Ps failure to contribute his share. They counterclaimed for damages.
Consequently, the court granted the intervention of Z, who alleged that they had bought the fishpond and were now its owners. Z
then filed a motion to dismiss upon the ground that venue was improperly laid? (a) Should the motion to dismiss be granted?
[56]Explain. (b) If the action filed by P against M and F were a real action affecting title over the fishpond, would your answer still be
the same?[57] Explain. (A) No. The motion to dismiss should not be granted. An action for the dissolution of a partnership is a
personal and not a real action, notwithstanding the fact that the main asset of the partnership was a real property. The sale of the
fishpond would merely be necessary incident to the liquidation of the partnership. Hence the venue was properly laid. (B) Yes my
answer would still be the same. The defendants had already waived the objection against improper venue when they did not raise
the same in the answer. The court having legally acquired authority to hear and decide the case, it cannot be divested of that
authority by the intervenors . An intervention cannot alter the nature of the action and the issues joined by the original parties
thereto. Intervention is not an independent proceeding but one which is merely ancillary to the existing action.

50. P filed a complaint against the surety with the RTC of Manila. The surety then filed a third-party complaint against X, who had
executed an indemnity agreement undertaking to indemnify the surety in case it becomes liable under the surety bond. X filed a
motion to dismiss the third party complaint on the ground of improper venue. X pointed out that the indemnity agreement between
the surety and X contains a provision that any suit arising from the agreement shall be solely and exclusively filed in Quezon City.
Should the court dismiss the third party complaint?[58] Explain. No. A third party complaint is ancillary to the main cause. Thus a
third party complaint has to yield to the jurisdiction and venue of the main action.

51. P filed a complaint for annulment of contracts of loan with cancellation of Real Estate Mortgage against D in Pasig, the place
where P had its office. P alleged that the contract of loan was without the knowledge of the corporation. D moved to dismiss the
complaint on the ground that the annulment of the REM is a real action, since P sought to compel D to accept its payment and thus
affecting title over the property and free it from the encumbrance. Thus it should have been filed in Quezon City, where the
encumbered properties are located. Is a complaint for cancellation of REM a real action?[59] Explain. No. The instant action to annul
a contract and its accessory REM is a personal action. An action for cancellation of REM is a personal action if the mortgagee has
nit foreclosed the mortgage and the mortgagor is still in possession of the premises as his title to or possession of the property is not
in dispute. Here there was no foreclosure yet and the mortgagor was still in possession of the real mortgage.
52. When is Rule 4 on venue of actions not applicable?[60] 1. In those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise. 2.
Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the exclusive venue thereof.

53. Give examples of cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise.[61] 1.Civil and criminal action for libel shall be filed with
the RTC having jurisdiction over the place where the libelous article is printed and first published or where any of the offended
parties actually resides at the time of the commission of the offense. 2. Petitions for declaration of nullity and annulment of marriage
shall be file in the family court of the province or city where the petitioner or respondent has been residing at least 6 months prior to
the date of filing 3. Petitions for rehabilitation shall be filed in the RTC having jurisdiction over the territory where the debtors
principal office is located 4. Cases govern by Section 1(a) of the SC Interim Rules of Procedure Governing Intra-corporate
Controversies shall be filed in the RTC having jurisdiction over the principal office of the corporation, partnership or association 5.
Petition for quo warranto against a person usurping a public office position or franchise can be brought only in the Supreme Court,
Court of appeals or in the RTC exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area 6. Petition for deposition before action shall be filed in
the court of the place of the residence of any expected adverse party.

54. P applied for 6 cellular phone subscription with Piltel. P later filed with the RTC of Iligan City a complaint for sum of money and
damages against Piltel. The latter moved to dismiss on the ground of improper venue, citing the common provision in the
subscription agreements which provides that: Venue of all suits arising from this agreement shall be in the proper courts of Makati
City. Subscriber expressly waives any other venue. Should the motion to dismiss be granted?[62] Yes. The exclusive venue
provision was held valid by the Supreme Court. SC distinguished this case from Sweet Lines v. Teves 83 SCRA 361, in which the
plaintiffs were virtually compelled to buy tickets from Sweet Lines otherwise they would be stranded in Bohol. Here the plaintiff had
unfettered freedom to sign or not sign the subscription agreement.

55. PB Com Filed a collection case against D before the RTC of Manila, PB Coms place of business, based on the Surety
Agreement (SA) executed by D in relation to a credit line PB Com extended to International Trading Company. However, in this
promissory note executed by ITC, it was expressly stipulated that the venue for any legal action that may arise out of the said
Promissory Note shall be Makati to the exclusion of all other courts. D moved to dismiss on the ground of improper venue. Can PB
Com file the collection case in Manila, where the Surety Agreement is silent on the venue?[63] No. Under the "complementary-
contracts-construed-together" doctrine. The SA can be enforced only in conjunction with the promissory note. The venue stipulation
in the PN thus also applies to the SA as an ancillary contract of the PN. The venue should be laid in Makati.

56. Respondent entered into a payroll agreement with the bank. The agreement contained a venue stipulation which reads thus: In
case of litigation, venue shall be in the proper trial courts of Manila for determination of any and all questions arising here under. A
dispute arising from the payroll agreement between Respondent and the bank ensued. Respondent filed an action for damages with
the RTC of Quezon City where he resides. The bank filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of improper venue. Should the motion
to dismiss be granted?[64] No. The venue stipulation here is not exclusive but merely permissive for it does not contain the words
expressing the intent that Manila is an exclusive venue, like "exclusively" or "solely". Hence the filing of the case in Quezon City
where the plaintiffs resides is proper.

57. When may the ground of improper venue be raised by the defendant?[65] In a motion to dismiss or in an answer if no motion to
dismiss was filed. The former rule, which provides that "when improper venue is not objected to in a motion to dismiss it is deemed
waived. Was deleted in 1997 rules of civil procedure. Note also that in cases governed by the rule on summary procedure and in
ejectment cases a motion to dismiss is a prohibited pleading.

58. May the trial court dismiss a complaint motu propio on the ground of improper venue?[66] No, since if the defendant does not
raise the objection of improper venue either in the motion to dismiss or in the answer it is deemed to have waived it.

59. What civil cases are governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure?[67] 1.Ejectment cases 2. Cases where total amount of the
plaintiffs claim does not exceed 100,000 or 200,000 in metro Manila exclusive of interests and cost.

60. What are the pleadings allowed under the Rule on Summary Procedure?[68] 1. Complaint; 2. Compulsory counterclaim; 3.
Cross-claims; and 4.the Answers thereto.

61. What are the prohibited pleadings, motions, and petitions under the Rule on Summary Procedure?[69] 1. Motion to dismiss the
complaint except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. 2. Motion for a bill of particulars. 3. Motion for new trial, or for
reconsideration of a judgment, or for reopening of trial. 4. Petition for relief from judgment. 5. Motion for extension of time to file
pleadings, affidavits, or any other paper. 6. Memoranda. 7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any
interlocutory order issued by the court. 8. Motion to declare the defendant in default. 9. Dilatory motions for postponement. 10.
Reply. 11. Third-party complaints. 12. Interventions.

62. In an ejectment case, the court dismissed the complaint for failure of the plaintiff to appear during the preliminary conference.
The plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the dismissal order. The defendant contends that the dismissal had become final
and executory since the motion for reconsideration is a prohibited pleading and hence does not suspend the reglementary period to
appeal. Is the Defendants contention correct?[70] Explain. No. The motion for reconsideration prohibited under sec 19c of the rule
on summary procedure is that which seeks reconsideration of a judgment rendered by the court after trial on the merits. The
dismissal order is not a judgment on merits after the trial of the case.

63. P filed with the MeTC of Manila a suit against D to collect the sum of P100,000. The MeTC rendered judgment in favor of P. D
appealed to the RTC which affirmed the challenged decision. D filed with the CA a motion for extension of 15 days to file a petition
for review. May P in the meantime move for the execution of the judgment as a matter of right?[71] Explain. Yes the decision of the
RTC in civil cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure shall be immediately executory without prejudice to a further appeal
that may be taken therefrom.

64. What cases are governed by the Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases?[72] This rule shall govern the procedure before
the MTC in actions for payment of money where the value of the claim does not exceed 100,000 exclusive of interests and costs.

65. When shall the MTC apply the Rule of procedure for Small Claims Cases?[73] The MTC shall apply the Rule in all actions
which are purely civil in nature, where the claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for payment or reimbursement of sum of
money; and in actions which involving the civil aspect of criminal actions. The claims or demands may be for money owing under
contracts or for damages arising from negligence, quasi contract and contract.

66. Are the Rules of Civil Procedure applicable to small claims cases?[74] Yes, but only suppletorily insofar as they are not
inconsistent with the Rules.
67. What are the prohibited pleadings and motions in small claims cases?[75] The prohibited pleadings and motions are essentially
the same as those prohibited under the Rule on Summary Procedure. The only difference is that motions to dismiss on whatever
ground are prohibited in small claims cases.

68. Are decisions in small claims cases appealable?[76] No. decisions in small claims cases are final and unappealable. An
aggrieved party may however resort in appropriate cases to a special civil action for certiorari in case of grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack of or excess of jurisdiction. The petition for certiorari shall be filed with the RTC. Since a motion for
reconsideration is a prohibited pleading, a party must file the petition for certiorari without filing a motion for reconsideration of the
judgment.

69. Define pleadings.[77] Pleadings are the written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the parties submitted to the
court for appropriate judgment.

70. What are the pleading allowed by the Rules of Court?[78] complaint, counterclaim, cross claim, third party complaint, complaint
in intervention, answer and reply.

71. What is a complaint?[79] It is a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting the plaintiffs cause or causes of action, with
a specification of the relief sought, but it may add a general prayer for such further relief as maybe deemed just or equitable.

72. What is an answer?[80] It is the pleading where the defendant sets forth his affirmative or negative defenses. It may likewise be
the response to a counter- claim or a cross-claim.

73. Co Batong, a Taipan, filed a civil action for damages with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Paraaque City against Jose
Penduko, a news reporter of the Philippine Times, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Paraaque City. The
complaint alleged, among others, that Jose Penduko wrote malicious and defamatory imputations against Co Batong; that Co
Batongs business address is in Makati City; and that the libelous article was first printed and published in Paraaque City. The
complaint prayed that Jose Penduko be held liable to pay P200,000.00, as moral damages; P150,000.00, as exemplary damages;
and P50,000.00, as attorneys fees. Jose Penduko filed a Motion to Dismiss on the following grounds: 1. The RTC is without
jurisdiction because under the Totality Rule, the claim for damages in the amount of P350,000.00 fall within the exclusive original
jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Paraaque City. 2. The venue is improperly laid because what the complaint
alleged is Co Batongs business address and not his residence address. Are the grounds invoked in the Motion to Dismiss proper?
[81] 1) The RTC is without jurisdiction because under the totality Rule, the claim for damages in the amount of P350,000 fall within
the exclusive original jurisdiction of the metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Paraaque City.; 2) No, the grounds invoked in the
motion to dismiss improper. The ground that the complaint mentioned the complainants office address rather than his residence is
of no moment since the complaint also stated that the libelous article was printed and first published in Paranaque City. Under
Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code, venue in a civil action for libel also lies in the place where the libelous article was printed and
first published.

74. What are the kinds of defenses?[82] Define and Explain. 1. Affirmative defenses allegation of anew matter which while
hypothetically admitting the material allegations in the pleading would nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by the claiming party. It
is in the nature of confession and avoidance. 2. Negative defenses specific denial of the material facts or facts alleged in the
pleading essential to establish the plaintiffs cause of action

75. Give examples of affirmative defenses.[83] Fraud, prescription release payment illegality statute of frauds, estoppel, former
recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other by way of confession and avoidance.

76. P filed a complaint against B and C who are made co-defendants. C files an answer serving a copy thereof upon P. Does C also
need to serve a copy upon B?[84] Explain. No. A co-defendant does not need to serve a copy of the answer against a co-defendant
except where there is a cross claim in the answer or in case of S5 R62 in interpleader where the conflicting claimants should serve a
copy of the answer on their co-defendants.

77. What is a counterclaim?[85] It is any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing party. It partakes of a
complaint by the defendant against the plaintiff

78. P files a case against D. D files a counterclaim against P. May P file a counterclaim against Ds counterclaim?[86] Explain. Yes.
A counterclaim may be asserted against an original counterclaimant.

79. The Republic, through the PCCG and with the assistance of the Office of the Solicitor General, filed with the Sandiganbayan a
complaint against Cojuangco and Enrile for reconveyance and damages. Subsequently Enrile was granted leave of court to implead
Solicitor General Chavez as a defendant in a counterclaim for filing a harassment suit. Was the filing of the counterclaim against
OSG Chavez proper?[87] Explain. No. A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing party.
Chavez was not the opposing party but merely the counsel of the opposing party. Enrile has to file a separate suit if he wants to
claim damages against Chavez.

80. H filed with the RTC a complaint against D for damages. The RTC, after due proceedings, rendered a decision granting the
complaint and ordering D to pay damages to H. D timely filed an appeal before the CA, questioning the RTC decision. Meanwhile,
the RTC granted Hs motion for execution pending appeal. Upon receipt of the RTCs order granting execution pending appeal, D
filed with the CA another case, this time a special civil action for certiorari assailing the said RTC order. Is there a violation of the rule
against forum shopping considering that the two (2) actions emanating from the same case with the RTC were filed by D with the
CA?[88] Explain.

81. Is there an instance wherein a counterclaim may be asserted by the defending party against one who is not an opposing party?
[89] Explain. Yes. Under S13 Rule 6, a third party defendant may in proper cases assert a counterclaim against the original plaintiff
in respect of the latters claim against the third party plaintiff.

82. What are the kinds of counterclaims?[90] Compulsory Counterclaim and Permissive Counterclaim

83. What is a compulsory counterclaim?[91] One which arises out of or is necessarily connected with the transaction or occurrence
that is the subject matter of the opposing partys claim.
84. Distinguish a compulsory counterclaim from a permissive counterclaim.[92] page 177

Compulsory Counterclaim need not be accompanied by a certification against forum shopping and
certificate to file action whereas Permissive counterclaim must be accompanied by a certification against
forum shopping and whenever required by law, also a certificate to.

85. Why is a compulsory counterclaim termed as such?[93] A compulsory counterclaim is termed compulsory because there is an
element of compulsion to set it up. Under S2 of Rule 9 a compulsory counterclaim not set up shall be barred.

86. What is the reason behind S2R9?[94] The rule is designed to achieve resolution of the whole controversy at one time and in
one action and to avoid multiplicity of suits.

87. How should a compulsory counterclaim or cross-claim be set up?[95] A compulsory counterclaim or a cross claim that a
defending party has at the time he files his answer shall be contained therein.

88. May a compulsory counterclaim be set up in a motion to dismiss?[96] Explain. No. A counterclaim cannot be set up in a motion
to dismiss.

Yes. A compulsory counterclaim may be set up in a motion to dismiss due to lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter.

89. What are the requirements in order that a counterclaim may be considered compulsory?[97] Explain. 1. It must be cognizable
by a regular court of justice.2. It arises out of or is connected to the transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of the
opposing partys claim.3. It does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties over whom the court cannot acquire
jurisdiction. 4. It must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount and the nature thereof. 5. It must be existing at the
time the defendant files his answer.

90. P files a suit for sum of money in the sum of P500,000 against D in the RTC of Ozamis City. Assuming that Ds counterclaim
arises out of or is connected to the transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of Ps claim, can D file a counterclaim:
(a) For ejectment?[98] (b) For support?[99] (c) For sum of money in the sum of P250,000?[100] (d) For infringement of Ds patent?
[101] And (e) For delivery of title over a subdivision lot which P, as a subdivision developer, sold to D?[102] A. No. A counterclaim
must be within the jurisdiction of the court as to its nature. B. No. The counterclaim must be cognizable by the regular courts of
justice. An action for support is cognizable by a special court that is the family court. C. Yes, in the RTC a counterclaim may be
considered as compulsory regardless of the amount thereof. D. No. The counterclaim is cognizable by the special commercial court
which is not a regular court of justice. E. No. The counterclaim is within the jurisdiction of the HLURB.

91. P filed a suit for nullification of a promissory note against D on the ground of usurious and unconscionable interest rates. D
counterclaimed for the payment of the P1M loan with interest. He however did not pay the docket fees. Should the counterclaim be
dismissed for failure to pay docket fees?[103] Explain. No. The counterclaim for the payment of the loan with interest is compulsory
it arises out of or is connected to the loan transaction subject of the complaint. The grant of the counterclaim would negate or defeat
the suit for nullification. Being compulsory there is no need to pay the docket fees therein.

92. F filed a collection suit for P387,000 against R in the RTC of Davao City. Aside from alleging payment as a defense, R in his
answer set up counterclaims for P100,000 as damages and P30,000 as attorneys fees as a result of the baseless filing of the
complaint, as well as for P250,000 as the balance of the purchase price of 30 units of air-conditioners he sold to F. Does RTC have
jurisdiction over Rs counterclaims and if so does he have to pay docket fees therefore?[104] Explain. Since Ramon filed only a
motion to dismiss, not an answer, the dismissal of the complaint would also bring about the dismissal of his counterclaims but he
can file a separate action for his permissive counterclaims. The compulsory counterclaims are deemed waived when he filed a
motion to dismiss the complaint instead of answering the same

93. D and P entered into a lease contract whereby D leased Room 401 to P. P was of the impression that the lease also covered
the rooftop of Room 442. However D padlocked the way to the rooftop. D insisted that the lease only covered Room 401 and that
Ps use of the rooftop was merely tolerated. P tendered the lease payment to D who refused to accept the same. P then filed an
action for consignation with the MTC against D. D then filed an answer with counterclaim for unlawful detainer against P. The CA
ruled that the raising of the counterclaim for ejectment was improper since such could only be initiated by a verified complaint
pursuant to S4R70. Was the filing of the counterclaim proper?[105] Explain. No. There is no rule that an ejectment suit cannot be
raised in a counterclaim. In fact in counterclaim for ejectment was compulsory since it was connected with the transaction or
occurrence constituting the subject matter of the opposing claim. i.e. The lease contract between D and P.

94. P filed with the MeTC of Makati a complaint against D to recover possession of a parcel of land with an assessed value of
P60,000. D filed an answer. The MeTC tried the case on the merits and rendered a decision in favor of P. D appealed to the RTC.
Assume the RTC does not dismiss the appeal and proceed to take cognizance thereof. D filed a motion to admit amended answer in
which he raises a counterclaim for P250,000 against P which arose out of the same transaction subject matter of the complaint. May
the court admit the amended answer?[106] Explain. No. The court may not admit the amended answer with counterclaim. Here the
RTC was deciding an appealed case and not an original action. Hence the exceptive clause of S7 R6 does not apply and the
counterclaim may not be admitted since it falls below the jurisdictional amount of the RTC.

95. P filed with the RTC an action for recovery of land against D. D filed an answer raising the defense of ownership. RTC decided
for D. On appeal the CA reversed the RTC and decided for P declaring him as owner of the land and ordering D to vacate the land.
The CA declared that there was no fraud or bad faith on the part of D. the CAs judgment became final and executory. P moved for
the execution of the judgment before the RTC. D opposed on the ground that a hearing supplementary to the execution should be
conducted to allow them to present evidence to prove that they are builders in good faith and to prove the value of the
improvements. (a) Should the RTC grant the opposition of D?[107] (b) May D file a separate action to recover the value of the
improvements introduced by them?[108] Explain. A. No. One a decision become final and executory, the only jurisdiction left with
the court is to order its execution. To allow the supplemental hearing would be to amend or alter a final and executory judgment. B.
No. Under S2 R9 a compulsory counterclaim not set up is deemed barred. The claim for reimbursement of the value of the
improvements is in the nature of a compulsory counterclaim since it is connected with the transaction or occurrence constituting the
subject matter of the petitioners claim.
96. A sues L for recovery of a parcel of land. L seeks in turn to be reimbursed of the value of improvements she had introduced on
the same land and the payment of damages she had sustained. Should L file a separate action against A for that purpose?
[109]Explain. No. L should not file a separate action against A for that purpose. Under S2 R3 a compulsory counterclaim not set up
shall be barred. Here the claim of Leah for reimbursement of the value of the improvements she had introduced on the same land
and the payment of damages she had sustained is compulsory counterclaim since it arises out or is connected to the suit of A for
recovery of land. A favorable judgment on Ls counterclaim would undermine As suit for recovery since L would have the right of
retention under Art 546 of the Civil Code. Hence L should set up her claim for reimbursement and damages as a compulsory
counterclaim against A.

97. Would the dismissal of the main complaint also result in the dismissal of the counterclaim?[110] Explain. No. The dismissal of
the main complaint will not correspondingly result in the dismissal of the counterclaim where the defendant had already filed and
served his counterclaim upon the plaintiff. The defendant has the option of prosecuting the counterclaim in the same or in a
separate action. The exception would be where the defendant pleaded his counterclaim AFTER the service upon him of the
plaintiffs motion for dismissal. In such a case, the dismissal of the complaint will also result in the dismissal of the counterclaim. The
reason is quite obvious: the defendant already has notice of the plaintiffs motion for dismissal at the time he pleads his counterclaim
and is therefore presumed to have borne the risk of dismissal.

98. What is the compelling test of compulsoriness to determine whether a claim is compulsory?[111] Explain. The test involves
asking the question whether there is logical relationship between the claim and the counterclaim that is where conducting separate
trials would entail substantial duplication of effort and time by the parties and the court. If there is such a logical relationship then the
claim is compulsory.

99. FBC was engaged by U to construct a multi-level apartment building in Forbes Park. Forbes Park Association (FPA) suspended
all entry permits of the construction after discovering that the same was violative of the subdivisions deed of restriction. FBC filed an
action for injunction and damages against FPA. FPA filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that U, not FBC was the real party in
interest. It was granted which became final. Later on FPA filed an action against FBC to remove the structures it built and for
damages. (a) If you were the counsel for FBC, what would you do?[112] Explain. (b) If you were the counsel for FPA, instead of filing
a motion to dismiss, what would you have done?[113] Explain. (c) Assume that no motion to dismiss was filed by FBC in the second
case and the RTC decided for FPA. On appeal, may the judgment of the RTC in the second case be set aside?[114] Explain. A. I
would file a motion to dismiss the suit of FPA on the ground of res judicata. B. I would not file a motion to dismiss as an affirmative
defense in the answer. I would plead in my answer the claim for damages and removal as a compulsory counterclaim. C. Yes the
judgment of the RTC may be set aside on the ground of res judicata.

100. P sues D who moves to dismiss for failure of the complaint to state a cause of action. The motion is granted and the case
dismissed. The dismissal became final. Then, D sues P on a claim arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as Ps earlier
attempted claim. P defends on the ground that Ds claim is precluded by his failure to raise it as a counterclaim in the first action. Is
Ps defense meritorious?[115] Explain.

Yes, if the dismissal of the main action results in the dismissal of the counterclaim.

101. Fe filed a collection suit for P387,000 against Ramon in the RTC of Davao City. Aside from alleging payment as a
defense, Ramon in his answer set up counterclaims for P100,000 as damages and P30,000 as attorneys fees as a result of the
baseless filing of the complaint, as well as for P250,000 as the balance of the purchase price of 30 units of air-conditioners he sold
to Fe. (a) Suppose Ramons counterclaim for the unpaid balance is P310,000, what will happen to his counterclaims if the court
dismisses the complaint after holding a preliminary hearing on Ramons affirmative defense?[116] (a) Ramons counterclaim may be
prosecuted in the same or in a separate action pursuant to S6R16 which provides that the dismissal of the action shall be without
prejudice to the defendant prosecuting his counterclaims in the same or in a separate action. (b) Under the same premise as
paragraph (b) above, suppose that instead of alleging payment as a defense in his answer, Ramon filed a motion to dismiss on that
ground, at the same time setting up his counterclaims, and the court grants his motion. What will happen to his counterclaims?
[117] Explain. (b) Ramons counterclaim for 130,000 will be barred since it is a compulsory counterclaim which was not set up in the
answer pursuant to S2R9. A counterclaim cannot be set up in a motion to dismiss. His counterclaim for 310,000 may still be
prosecuted in a separate action since it is a permissive counterclaim.

102. Petitioner filed a complaint for consolidation of title over land sold to him by Respondent under a pacto de retro sale.
Respondent filed an answer with counterclaim asking that Petitioner receive P810 and that the pacto de retro sale be declared as an
equitable mortgage. Petitioner did not file an answer to the Respondents counterclaim. Upon motion, the trial court declared
Petitioner in default as to Respondents counterclaim and rendered judgment in favor of Respondent. Did the trial court properly
declare petitioner in default in respect of Respondents counterclaim?[118] Explain. No. The counterclaim of Respondent is
compulsory since it is connected with the subject matter of Petitioners complaint for consolidation. A party cannot be declared in
default for failing to answer a compulsory counterclaim because the issues raised in the compulsory counterclaim are deemed
automatically joined by the allegations of the complaint.

103. Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant for recovery of possession of real property with the Regional Trial Court of
Manila. Defendant filed an answer with affirmative defenses and interposed a counterclaim of damages and attorneys fees arising
from the filing of the complaint. When plaintiff failed to file an answer on the counterclaim, defendant moved to declare him in
default. Notwithstanding notice of the motion, plaintiff did not file an opposition. As judge, how would you resolve the motion to
declare plaintiff in default?[119] Explain. As a judge, I would deny the motion to declare plaintiff in default. The SC has held that a
party cannot be declared in default for failing to answer a compulsory counterclaim, since the issues in such counterclaim are
automatically traversed by the complaint. Here the counterclaim for damages and attorneys fees arising from the filing of the
complaint is a compulsory counterclaim since it arises from the filing of the complaint by the plaintiff. Hence plaintiff cannot be
declared in default.

104. P filed against D an action for recovery of ownership and possession of a parcel of land. D filed an answer alleging that
he was a possessor in good faith and thus had a right of retention. D counterclaimed for reimbursement of the value of the useful
improvements he had introduced on the land. P did not file an answer to Ds counterclaim. D filed a motion to declare P in default as
to his counterclaim. Should the court grant Ds motion?[120] Explain. No. The counterclaim of D is compulsory since it is connected
with the subject matter of Ps complaint for recovery of ownership and possession of a parcel of land. A party cannot be declared in
default for failing to answer a compulsory counterclaim because the issues raised in the compulsory counterclaim are deemed
automatically joined by the allegations of the complaint.

105. L obtained a series of loans from Banco De Oro for which he executed three REMs. L defaulted on the 3 rd loan and
BDO extrajudicially foreclosed the REM on the 1 st and 3rd loan. Two days before the scheduled public auction. L filed with the RTC of
Quezon City a complaint for specific performances, torts, and damages against BDO for including the 1 st REM in foreclosure. BDO
filed an answer with counterclaim. BDO countered that there is a cross-default provision in the loan contracts that justifies the
inclusion of properties in the 1 st REM in the foreclosure. BDO counterclaimed for attorneys fees on the ground that the suit was
malicious and baseless. The auction sale proceeded but the proceeds realized therefrom were not sufficient to answer for Ls loan
obligation. BDO sent a demand letter to L to pay the deficiency but this was not heeded by L. L filed a motion to admit supplemental
complaint which averred that BDO had proceeded with the auction sale. The trial court admitted the supplemental complaint.
Subsequently, during the pendency of Ls complaint, BDO filed with the RTC of Mandaluyong against L a collection case for the
deficiency for which L filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the collection case is a compulsory counterclaim that should have
been set up in Ls complaint for tort and damages since it arose from the same loan transaction. Should Ls motion to dismiss the
collection case be granted? [121] Explain. No. The collection does not involve compulsory counterclaim. A compulsory counterclaim
is one which must be existing at the time of filing the answer. (S8R11). An after-acquired counterclaim is merely permissive. Thus a
party who fails to file a counterclaim arising out of or connected with the transaction subject of the plaintiffs suit but which did not
exist at the time said party files his answer is not barred from filing such claims. He can do so by supplemental pleading or by a
separate action. Here BDOs right of action accrued only after Ls refusal to pay after receiving demand letters for the deficiency
from BDO.

106. What is cross-claim?[122] A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of transaction or
occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a counterclaim therein. Such a cross-claim may include a
claim that the party against whom it is asserted is or may be liable to the cross-claimant for all or part of a claim asserted in the
action against the cross-claimant (S8R6).

107. D and E are solidarily indebted to P for P500,000. P filed a collection case against D and E for P500,000. D filed his
answer in which he alleged that he had already paid P500,000 to P prior to the filling of the complaint. Judgment rendered in favor of
D and E dismissing Ps complaint, the court finding that D had already paid P even prior to the filing of the case. The judgment
became final and executory. D then files an action to collect P250,000 from E as reimbursement. E files a motion to dismiss on the
ground that D should have filed his claim as a cross-claim in the collection case filed by P. Should the court grant the motion to
dismiss? [123]Explain.

Yes. A cross claim arising from the transaction which is the subject matter of the complaint or a counter claim
therein, against a co-party must be set-up in the claimants answer otherwise is barred.

108. Is there such a thing as a permissive cross-claim?[124] Explain. In a sense yes. A cross-claim which either matured or
was acquired by a party after serving his pleading is not compulsory. (S9 R11, Namarco v. Federation of Namarco Distributors, Inc.
49 SCRA 238).

109. D and E are jointly and severally indebted to P under a promissory note for P500,000. P sues D and E before the RTC. D
filed a cross-claim against E to recover P450,000 arising from the non-payment of the price of a car sold and delivered by D to E. E
files a motion to dismiss the cross-claim. Should the court grant the motion to dismiss?[125] Explain. Yes. A cross-claim is any claim
by any party against a co-party arising of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a
counterclaim therein (S8 R6). Here, the cross-claim is not proper since the claim by D against E did not arise out of the loan
transaction subject of the complaint. Hence the court has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the cross-claim.

110. P filed a case against D and E. D filed a cross-claim against E. E did not answer the cross-claim. May D move to declare
E in default of the cross-claim?[126] Explain. Yes. E should answer the cross-claim otherwise he may be declared in default of the
same. Under S3 R9 the claiming party may move for default in case of failure to answer of the defending party. The cross-claimant
is a claiming party while the cross-defendant is the defending party within the purview of the Rules of the Court (S1 R3). Compare
with the rule that the opposing party cannot be declared in default for failure to answer a compulsory counterclaim.

111. P filed a case against D and E. D filed a cross-claim against E. May E in his answer to the cross-claim, assert a
counterclaim against Ds cross-claim?[127] Explain. Yes. The cross-defendant can file an answer to the cross-claim and he may
plead in the answer a counter-claim or a cross-claim. (See old S10 R6).

112. D and E are solidarily indebted to P for P500,000. P filed a collection case against D and E for P500,000. D and E filed
their answer alleging the defense of prescription. Judgment rendered in favor of P and the same became final and executory. D
pays the P500,000 to the sheriff. D then files an action to collect P250,000 from E. E files a motion to dismiss on the ground that D
should have filed his claim as a cross-claim in the collection case filed by P. should the court grant the motion to dismiss?
[128] Explain. No. The cross-claim is not compulsory but permissive since Ds right to reimbursement arose only after he had served
his answer. Prior to paying to paying P, D did not yet have the right of reimbursement as against E.

113. D borrowed P500,000 from P with X acting as the surety. D did not pay on maturity so P sued D and X. Judgment
rendered in favor of P as against D and X for P500,000. The bank account of X was garnished in the amount of P500,000. X
demanded indemnification from D but the latter did not pay X. X sued D for indemnification. D argued that Xs claim for
indemnification was waived since he did not raise it as a cross-claim pursuant to S2R9. Is Ds argument meritorious?[129] Explain.
No. The cross-claim was merely permissive since Xs right to indemnification only arose after he had paid D. Also under S35 R39,
when a judgment is upon an obligation of one of the parties as security for one another, and the surety pays the amount or any part
thereof, either by sale of his property or before sale, he may compel repayment from the principal.

114. S unlawfully ousted O from his parcel of land. S then sold and delivered the land to B. O files an action for reconveyance
against S and B. Judgment was rendered in favor of O. the judgment became final and executory. Later on B filed an action for
breach of warranty against eviction against S. S moved to dismiss on the ground that the action was barred since B should have
raised the same as a cross-claim against S in the reconveyance suit. Should Ss motion to dismiss be granted?[130] Explain. No. A
cross-claim which matured or arose after the defendant has served his answer is permissive and not mandatory. Here Bs cross-
claim for breach of warranty against eviction arose only after a final judgment had been rendered in the reconveyance suit. Under
the Law on Sales, the warranty against eviction cannot be enforced until a final judgment has been rendered whereby the vendee
loses the thing acquired or a part thereof. (Articles 1548 and 1557, Civil Code). Hence the cross-claim is not barred.

115. Is a cross-claim subject to the payment of a docket fee?[131] Explain. A cross-claim filed before the MTC is ot subject to
a docket fee but one filed with the RTC is. (S7[a] R141).

116. P filed a complaint for collection of a P1,000,000 loan against D and E before the RTC of Manila. D filed a counterclaim
against P for P500,000 for moral and exemplary damages claiming that the filing of the suit was malicious and baseless. D also filed
a counterclaim against P for P450,000 arising from the unpaid price of a car sold by D to P. In the meantime D also filed a cross-
claim against E for indemnification contending that the loan was really incurred for the benefit of E only. No docket fees were paid on
the counterclaims and cross-claims. (a) Is D liable to pay docket fees on his counterclaims?[132] Explain. (b) Is D liable to pay
docket fees on his cross-claim?[133] Explain. a) D is not liable to pay docket fees on his counterclaim for P500,000 since the
counterclaim is compulsory. Collection of docket fees on compulsory counterclaims has been suspended by the Supreme Court in
its 21 September 2004 Resolution. D is liable for the payment of docket fees on his counterclaim for P450,000 since the same is a
permissive counterclaim. b) D is liable to pay docket fees on his cross-claim which was filed before the RTC, pursuant to S7 (a)
R141. The SC did not suspend the collection of docket fees on cross-claims filed with the RTC.

117. Distinguish a counterclaim from a cross-claim.[134] 1. AS TO WHOM DIRECTED. A counter-claim is directed against the
opposing party while a cross-claim is directed against the co-party. 2. AS TO CONNECTION WITH THE MAIN ACTION. A
counterclaim may or may not arise out of the transaction constituting the subject matter of the opposing partys claim while a cross-
claim always arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the original action or of a counterclaim therein.
3. AS TO COMPULSORINESS. A counterclaim may or may not be compulsory while a cross-claim is always compulsory.

118. Define a reply.[135]. A reply is pleading, the function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of new
matters alleged by way of defense in the answer and thereby join or make issue as to such new matters.

119. Is there a need for the Plaintiff to file a reply?[136] Explain. No. If a party does not file such reply, all the new matters
alleged in the answer are deemed controverted. (S10 R6).

120. When is there a need for the Plaintiff to file a reply?[137] Explain. When a defense is set up in the answer which based
on an actionable document copied in or attached thereto and the plaintiff wants to contest the genuineness and due execution of the
document. The plaintiff should file a reply specifically denying under oath the documents authenticity and due execution and setting
forth what he claims to be the facts. (S8 R8).

121. Assume that the suspension of the Usury Law was lifted by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. P files a complaint to recover
a loan with interest against D. D filed an answer in which he raised the defense that the interest rate charged by P was usurious. Is
there a need for P to file a reply if he wants to deny the allegations of usury?[138] Explain.

No. If the allegations of usury is contained in the defendants answer, for instance, by way of defense to a complaint
for a sum of money, it is not necessary for plaintiff to file a reply thereto in order to deny that allegation under
oath.

122. May the Plaintiff set up in his reply claims arising from the new matters set up by way of defense in the answer?
[139] Explain. No. The plaintiff should set forth such new claims in an amended or supplemental complaint.

123. What is a third-party complaint?[140] A third-party complaint is a claim that the defendant may file against a person not
the party to the action for contribution, indemnification, subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponents claim. (CISO).
The defendant should obtain leave of court in order to file a third-party complaint.

124. What is a fourth-party complaint?[141] A fourth-party complaint is the claim that the third-party defendant may file against
a person not a party to the action for contribution, indemnification, subrogation or any other relief, in respect on his opponents claim.
The third-party defendant should obtain leave of court in order to file a third-party complaint.

125. Distinguish a third-party complaint from a third-party claim.[142] AS TO ITS NATURE. A third-party complaint is a
pleading while a third-party claim is not a pleading but an affidavit or paper. AS TO WHO FILES. A third-party complaint is filed by a
party to a case while a third-party claim is filed by a stranger to the case. AS TO PURPOSE. The purpose of a third-party complaint
is for the defendant to bring in the stranger as a party to the case while the purpose of the third-party claim is for the third-party to
notify the sheriff of his right or claim over the property attached, levied, or seized by the sheriff.

126. Illustrate each of the grounds for a third-party complaint.[143] CONTRIBUTION. If D and X are liable for tort against P
and the latter sues D only, D may file a third-party complaint against X for contribution, since joint tort-feasors are solidarily iabe
under Article 2194 of the Civil Code. INDEMNIFICATION. P sues the surety to recover the loan the latter had guaranteed. The
surety may file a third-party complaint against the principal debtor for indemnification. At any rate, a judgment against the surety is
also binding upon the principal debtor who had notice of the action or proceeding and an opportunity at the suretys request to join in
the defense. (S46 R39; 2 MANUEL V. MORAN, COMMENTS ON THE RULES OF COURT 346 [1979 ed.]).SUBROGATION. X
recklessly drives his car and collides with Ps car destroying it. P sues the insurer to recover damages on his car insurance policy.
The insurer can file a third-party complaint against X since it would be subrogated to the rights of the insured upon payment to the
latter.OTHER RELIEF IN RESPECT OF HIS OPPONENTS CLAIM. P sues D to recover real property. D may file a third-party
complaint against X, who sold the real property to him, for breach of warranty against eviction. (Art. 1548, Civil Code). Insured sues
insurer to recover on the policy issued by the latter. The insurer may file a third-party complaint against the re-insurer.

127. Rufino is indebted to Simplicio in the amount of P400,000 payable on 31 December 2007. To meet the obligation, Rufino
saved P200,000 by January 2007. During that month, Rosendo was able to borrow the P200,000 from Rufino after having been
warned that Rosendo should return the P200,000 to Rufino before 31 December 2007. In February 2008, Simplicio sued Rufino for
the collection of his credit. Rufino pleaded in his answer that he was ready to pay P200,000 to Simplicio and, reciting his transaction
with Rosendo, he filed a third-party complaint against Rosendo for the recovery of the P200,000. Is the third-party admissible? (80
Bar Q2 ed).[144] No. The third-party caomplaint is not admissible. Under S11 R6, a third-party complaint is available only if the
defendant has the right to demand contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponents claim. Here
the right to demand relief by Rufino against Rosendo was not in the respect of Simplicios claim against Rufino. Hence the third-
party complaint is not admissible. (See Commercial Bank & Trust Co. v. Republic Armored Car Service Corp., 8 SCRA 425; DEAN
MARIANO MAGLASIN, ANSWERS TO BAR QUESTIONS FROM 1980 TO 1989, pp. 1-2 [1990]).

128. B and C borrowedP900,000 from A. The promissory note was executed by B and C in a joint and several capacity. B, who
received the money from A, gave C P450,000. C in turn loaned P225,000 out of the P450,000 he received to D. In an action filed by
A against B and C with the RTC of Quezon City, cab C file a third-party complaint against D for the amount of P225,000? (97 Bar
Q2b ed).[145] No. C cannot file a third-party complaint against D for the amount of P225,000. Cs claim against D is not in the way
of a claim for contribution, indemnity, subrogation, or other relief, in respect of As claim. The loan by C to D is separate and distinct
from the loan by A to B and C. Note: A rule to thumb to determine the propriety of a third-party complaint is to ask if it is appropriate
or proper for the third-party plaintiff to bring the third-party complaint even without the main complaint being filed against him. If the
answer is yes, then the third-party complaint is not proper. In the example above, C could have brought a complaint for collection
against D even without the main complaint filed by A against C.

129. D borrowed P500,000 from P with X acting as the surety. D did not pay on maturity so P sued X. Judgment rendered in
favor of P as against X for P500,000. The bank account of X was garnished in the amount of P500,000. X demanded
indemnification from D but the latter did not pay so X filed a suit seeking indemnification from D. D filed a motion to dismiss arguing
that X should have filed a third-party complaint against D and not having done so, the action for indemnification is barred by res
judicata or waiver. Should the motion to dismiss be granted?[146] No. Unlike the compulsory counterclaim or a cross-claim, the filing
of the third-party complaint is not compulsory. Hence Xs claim for indemnification against D is not barred by res judicata or waiver.

130. D and E are solidarily indebted to P for P500,000. The debt is due and outstanding. P sues D for the P500,000 before the
RTC. D filed a motion for leave to file a third-party complaint against E seeking contribution of P250,000. Should the court grant the
motion even though the amount of the claim does not exceed P300,000?[147] Yes. Where the regional trial court has jurisdiction
over the main case, it also has ancillary jurisdiction over the third-party complaint even though the amount claimed falls below the
jurisdictional amount. A third-party complaint is merely auxiliary to and is a continuation of the main action. (Republic v. Central
Surety & Ins. Co., 25 SCRA 641 [1968]; ANTONIO R. BAUTISTA, BASIC CIVIL PROCEDURE 25 [2003]; 1 FLORENZ D.
REGALADO, REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM 37 [7TH REV. ED., 3RD printing, 1999]; 1 MANUEL V. MORAN, COMMENTSON THE
RULES OF COURT 280-281 [1979 ed.]). (Note: It should be believed that the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction should also be
applicable mutatis mutandis to cross-claims.)

131. In an action brought by PCIB against RM and XY before the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila, XY interposed a
counterclaim of P450,000; a cross-claim against RM for P500,000; and a third-party complaint against DE for P425,000, all of which
were dismissed, upon proper motions, for lack of jurisdiction. Discuss the merits of the said order of dismissal.[148] The order of
dismissal with respect to the counterclaim is proper because a counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court, both as to its
nature and amount. (S7 R6). It is submitted that the dismissal with respect to the cross-claim and third-party complaint is also
proper. It is believed that the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction is not applicable if what is involved is the main action filed with a
metropolitan trial court rather than a regional trial court since the amounts of the cross-claim and third-party complaint would be
above rather than below the jurisdictional amount. It is also difficult to conceive how a third party complaint, which is for contribution,
indemnity, subrogation or other relief, could exceed the amount of plaintiffs claim. Dean Mariano Magsalin is of the opinion that the
MTC has jurisdiction over the third party complaint invoking the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction as set forth in Republic v. Central
Surety and Insurance Co., 25 SCRA 641. (MARIANO MAGSALIN, ANSWERS TP BAR QUESTIONS FROM 1980 TO 1989, P. 71
[1ST ED.]). In Republic v. Central Surety and Insurance Co., however, the main complaint was filed with the Court of First Instance
and the third-party complaint was for an amount falling below the then jurisdictional amount of P10,000. In the given bar problem the
amount of third-party complaint falls above the jurisdictional amount of P400,000.

132. P filed a complaint against the surety with the RTC of Manila. The surety then filed a third-party complaint against X, who
had executed indemnity agreement undertaking to indemnify the surety in case it becomes liable under the surety bond. X filed a
motion to dismiss the third-party complaint on the ground of improper venue, X pointed out that the indemnity agreement between
the surety and X contains a provision that any suit arising from the agreement shall be solely and exclusively filed in Quezon City.
Should the court dismiss the third-party complaint?[149] No. A third-party complaint is ancillary to the main case. Thus, a third-party
complaint has to yield to the jurisdiction and venue of the main action. (Eastern Assurance & Surety Corp. v. Cui, G.R. L-54452, 20
July 1981).

133. P filed an action to recover on his insurance claim against insurer D. D filed a third-party complaint against re-insurer E
which was allowed by the trial court. Judgment was rendered in favor of P in respect of his complaints against D, and in favor of D
on its third-party complaint against E. Only D appealed from the judgment against it. May D move for the execution of the judgment
on the third-party complaint against E?[150] Yes. A third-party complaint is independent of and distinct from the complaint. Hence
the judgment on the third-party complaint may become final and executor without waiting for the final determination of the main
case. (See Pascual v. Bautista, 33 SCRA 301 [1970]; Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Tempongko, 27 SCRA 418 [1969]). E should
have appealed the judgment against it if it still wanted to contest the same.

134. P filed a case against D. D filed a motion for leave of court to file a third-party complaint against E. The court dismissed
the third-party complaint. May D appeal from the order?[151] Yes. Such an order would finally dispose of Ds right to implead E.
(Vda. De Dios v. Balagot, 20 SCRA 950 [1967]).

135. Xs car collided with Ps car destroying the latters car. P sues the insurer to recover the damages in his car insurance
policy. The insurer files a third-party complaint against X. May X in his answer to the third-party complaint raise the defense that Ps
car was at the time of the collision being driven by Ps friend who did not have a valid drivers license, thus violating the authorized-
driver clause of the car policy and barring P from recovering thereon?[152] Yes. Under S13 R6, a third-party defendant may allege in
his answer defenses that the third-party plaintiff may have against the original plaintiffs claim. The violation of the authorized-driver
clause is the defense that the insurer may have against the claim of the insured P, yet this may invoked by X in order to defeat or
negate the insurers claim pursuant to S13 R6.

136. P filed a collection case against D who acted as a surety in a loan extended by P to x. D in turn filed a third-party
complaint against X for indemnification. It turned out that X had already paid his loan to P even before P had brought his suit. May X
file a counterclaim against P for moral and exemplary damages for bringing malicious and unfounded suit and causing X to be
dragged into court?[153] Yes. Ordinarily a third-party defendant may not file a counterclaim against the original plaintiff, since the
original plaintiff is not an opposing party as to him. However under S13 R6, the third-party defendant, in proper cases, may assert a
counterclaim against the original plaintiff in respect of the latters claim against the third-party plaintiff. Here Xs counterclaim is
connected to the loan transaction subject of the suit filed by P against D. (S13 R6).

137. What is the rule in the event that there is a need to bring in new parties?[154] Explain.

138. What are the parts of a pleading?[155] The parts of a pleading are the following: 1. Caption. This sets forth the name of
the court, the title of the action, and the docket number if assigned. 2. Body. The body of a pleading sets forth is designation, the
allegations of the partys claim or defenses, the relief prayed for, and the date of the pleading. 3. Signature and Address. Must
include also the matters stated in answer to the next questions.

139. What matters or information should be stated by counsel below his signature? (PIRMA)[156] 1. His address which should
not be a post-office box. 2. His PTR official receipt number for the current year. 3. His IBP official receipt number for the current year.
4. His roll number. 5. Number and date of issue of his MCLE Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption for the current or
immediately preceding compliance period. (SC Resolution dated 17 February 2015). In papers and pleadings filed with the SC, the
counsel should indicate his contact details: e.g., phone number, fax number, cell phone number, or email address. (A.M. No. 07-6-5-
SC, 10 July 2007)

140. What is the effect if the counsel fails to state any of the said information below his signature?[157] The pleading is
considered as not having been signed.

141. Give the rules regarding the inclusion of the parties names in the pleadings.[158] 1. The names of all the parties should
be included in the original complaint. In subsequent pleadings, it is sufficient if the name of the first party on each side be stated with
an appropriate indication when there are other parties, such as by using the word, et. al. The names of all the parties in an appeal
shall also be indicated in the notice of appeal and record on appeal. (S5 & 6 R41). 2. In a class suit, it is sufficient if the names of
those appearing in the complaint as plaintiffs or in the answer as defendants be sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully
protect the interests of all concerned. (S12 R3) 3. Whenever the identity or name of the defendant is unknown, he may be sued as
the unknown owner, heir, devisee, or by such any designation as the case may require. When his identity or true name is
discovered, the pleading must be amended accordingly. (S14 R3) 4. When two or more persons not organized as an entity with
juridical personality enter into a transaction, they may be sued under the name by which they are generally or commonly known. In
the answer of such defendant, the names and addresses of the persons composing said entity must all be revealed. (S15 R3)

142. May a court adjudge a defendant liable for P1,000,000 where the specific amount prayed for in the complaint is only
P800,000 and there is no general prayer for such further or other relief as may be deemed just or equitable?[159] Yes provided by
the evidence so warrants and the defendant fails to object to the introduction of evidence on the additional P200,000. In such a case
the plaintiff shall pay the additional filing fee on the P200,000 which shall constitute a lien on the judgment award. (S2 R141). If the
defendant objects to such evidence, the court may nonetheless still admit the evidence if the presentation of the merits of the action
and the ends of substantial justice will be subserved thereby. The complaint should be ordered amended. (S5 R10). Note however
that the judgment rendered against a party in default cannot exceed the amount nor be different in kind than that prayed for. (S3[d]
R9)

143. May the court in its final judgment award a claim not alleged, or a relief different from, or more that that claimed in the
pleading?[160] Yes. (S2 R141). Of course, the evidence on record should be warrant and the provisions of S5 R10 should be taken
into account. The docket fees on such award shall constitute a lien on the judgment.

144. What is the rule regarding the signing of pleadings?[161] Every pleading must be signed by the party or counsel
representing him, stating in either case is address which should not be a post office box. (S3 R7).

145. The OSG in behalf of the Republic filed a complaint in the RTC foe the revocation of titles registered in the name of
Kenrick Development Corporation (KDC). KDC filed an answer which was purportedly signed by its counsel, Atty. G. the trials of the
case was held up by various pre-trial and discovery issues. Two years later, Atty. G who was no longer KDCs counsel, was
summoned in a congressional hearing on fake land titles. He testified that he prepared KDCs answer and sent an unsigned draft to
KDCs president. He testified that the signature appearing above his name in the answer was not his, that he did not authorize any
one to sign in his behalf, and he did not know signed above his name. The Republic filed a motion to declare KDC in default for
failure to file a valid answer. The RTC granted the motion, declared KDC in default, and allowed the Republic to present its evidence
ex parte. On appeal, the CA reversed the RTC, saying that Atty. G assented to the filing of the answer in his behalf as never
disowned the answer and resumed acting as counsel for KDC after its filing. Did the CA err?[162] explain. Yes. S3 R7 is quite clear
when it requires that a pleading must be signed by the party or counsel representing him. Hence only the signature of either the
party himself or his counsel operates to validly convert a pleading from one that is unsigned to one that is signed. Counsels
authority to assign a pleading is personal pleading is personal to him and maybe delegated only to another lawyer pursuant to Rule
9.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Hence Atty. Gs blanket authority, whether express or implied, for just anyone to sign
was void. The answer being unsigned, it produced no legal effect and thus KDC was properly declared in default. (Republic v.
Kendrick Development Corporation, G.R. 149576, 8 August 2006, Corona, J.). (Note: The court in its discretion may allow the defect
of an unassigned pleading to be remedied if the failure to sign was inadvertent and not intended to delay. Here it appears that the
filing of the spuriously signed answer was not inadvertent.)

146. What is the significance of counsels signature on a pleading?[163] The signature of counsel constitutes a certification by
him that: 1. He has read the pleading. 2. To the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it; and
3. It is not interposed for delay. (ld.).

147. Is it required that a pleading be under oath, verified or accompanied by affidavit?[164] Except when otherwise specifically
required by law or rule, pleadings need not be under oath, verified or accompanied by affidavit. (S4 R7).

148. In an original complaint for recovery of possession of common property, the heading of the complaint states: Heirs of
Mariano, Namely: Jose et. Al vs. Heirs of Ramon, et, al., do you the caption was properly prepared?[165] Explain.

No. The caption was not properly prepared because these names Jose, et al and Ramon, et al many persons
using these names Jose and Ramon. To make the caption properly prepared it must have their middle names and
family names.

149. D lost in the decision of the MTC. His counsel seasonably filed a notice of appeal but failed to sign the same. What is the
effect of the notice of appeal?[166] Explain.

Under the Rules of Court (S3R7), an unsigned pleading produces no legal affect.

150. Based on the preceding problem, will the court be liable if it allows the counsel to sign the notice of appeal without first
notifying the opposing counsel?[167] Explain.

No, because notice to the opposing counsel comes only after signing the notice of appeal