05 Pleading

A. Complaint
1. General

Rule 6 Kinds of Pleadings

Section 1 Pleadings defined
Pleadings are written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the parties submitted to the
court for appropriate judgment.

Section 3 Complaint
The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff's cause or causes of action. The names and
residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be stated in the complaint.

Rule 1 General Provisions

Section 5 Commencement of Action
A civil action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court. If an additional defendant
is impleaded in a later pleading, the action is commenced with regard to him on the date of the filing
of such later pleading, irrespective of whter the motion for its admission, if necessary, is denied by the
court.

2. Format, certification, verification

Rule 7
Section 1 Caption
The caption sets forth the name of the court, the title of the action, and the docket number if assigned.
The title of the action indicates the names of the parties. They shall all be named in the original
complaint or petition; but in subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name of the first party
on each side be stated with an appropriate indication when there are other parties.
Their respective participation in the case shall be indicated. (1a, 2a)
Section 2. The body
The body of the pleading sets fourth its designation, the allegations of the party's claims or defenses,
the relief prayed for, and the date of the pleading. (n)
(a) Paragraphs. — The allegations in the body of a pleading shall be divided into paragraphs
so numbered to be readily identified, each of which shall contain a statement of a single set of
circumstances so far as that can be done with convenience. A paragraph may be referred to by
its number in all succeeding pleadings. (3a)
(b) Headings. — When two or more causes of action are joined the statement of the first shall
be prefaced by the words "first cause of action,'' of the second by "second cause of action", and
so on for the others.
When one or more paragraphs in the answer are addressed to one of several causes of action in
the complaint, they shall be prefaced by the words "answer to the first cause of action" or
"answer to the second cause of action" and so on; and when one or more paragraphs of the
answer are addressed to several causes of action, they shall be prefaced by words to that effect.
(4)
 (c) Relief. — The pleading shall specify the relief sought, but it may add a general prayer for
such further or other relief as may be deemed just or equitable. (3a, R6)
(d) Date. — Every pleading shall be dated. (n)
Section 3 Signature and address
Every pleading must be signed by the party or counsel representing him, stating in either case his
address which should not be a post office box.
The signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by him that he has read the pleading; that to the best
of his knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it; and that it is not
interposed for delay.
An unsigned pleading produces no legal effect. However, the court may, in its discretion, allow such
deficiency to be remedied if it shall appear that the same was due to mere inadvertence and not
intended for delay. Counsel who deliberately files an unsigned pleading, or signs a pleading in
violation of this Rule, or alleges scandalous or indecent matter therein, or fails promptly report to the
court a change of his address, shall be subject to appropriate disciplinary action. (5a)
Section 4 Verification
Except when otherwise specifically required by law or rule, pleadings need not be under oath, verified
or accompanied by affidavit.
A pleading is verified by an affidiavit that the affiant has read the pleading and that the allegations
therein are true and correct of his personal knowledge or based on authentic records.
A pleading required to be verified which contains a verfication based on “information and belief” or
upon “knowledge, informationa nd belief,” or lacks a proper verification, shall be treated as an
unsigned pleading.
Section 5. Certification against forum shopping
The plaintiff or principal party shall certify under oath in the complaint or other initiatory pleading
asserting a claim for relief, or in a sworn certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed
therewith:
(a) that he has not theretofore commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same issues in
any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or
claim is pending therein;
(b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of the present status thereof;
and
(c) if he should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he
shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court wherein his aforesaid complaint or
initiatory pleading has been filed.
Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not be curable by mere amendment of the
complaint or other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal of the case without
prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon motion and after hearing. The submission of a false
certification or non-compliance with any of the undertakings therein shall constitute indirect contempt
of court, without prejudice to the corresponding administrative and criminal actions. If the acts of the
party or his counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum shopping, the same shall be ground
for summary dismissal with prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt, as well as a cause for
administrative sanctions. (n)

AM No. 07-6-5
Statement of Contact Details of Parties or Their Counsels in All Papers and Pleadings Filed with
the SC

SC AM 00-2-10 May 1, 200 Amended Sec. 4 of Rule 7 on Verification of Pleadings

Bar Matter No. 1922

June 3, 2008
RE. NUMBER AND DATE OF MCLE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION/EXEMPTION
REQUIRED IN ALL PLEADINGS/MOTIONS.
Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information is a resolution of the Court En Banc dated June 3, 2008
"Bar Matter No. 1922. – Re: Recommendation of the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education
(MCLE) Board to Indicate in All Pleadings Filed with the Courts the Counsel’s MCLE Certificate of
Compliance or Certificate of Exemption. – The Court Resolved to NOTE the Letter, dated May 2,
2008, of Associate Justice Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura, Chairperson, Committee on Legal Education
and Bar Matters, informing the Court of the diminishing interest of the members of the Bar in the
MCLE requirement program.
The Court further Resolved, upon the recommendation of the Committee on Legal Education and Bar
Matters, to REQUIRE practicing members of the bar to INDICATE in all pleadings filed before the
courts or quasi-judicial bodies, the number and date of issue of their MCLE Certificate of Compliance
or Certificate of Exemption, as may be applicable, for the immediately preceding compliance
period. Failure to disclose the required information would cause the dismissal of the case and the
expunction of the pleadings from the records.
The New Rule shall take effect sixty (60) days after its publication in a newspaper of general
circulation." Caprio-Morales Velasco, Jr., Nachura, JJ., on official leave. (adv216a)
Very truly yours,
MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA(sgd)
Clerk of Court

Bar Matter No. 1132

Keywords: Clarification of Fr. Ranhilio C. Aquino of Philippine Judicial Academy

Whether our Resolution of 12 November 2002 may be construed as precluding a party who may not
be a lawyer from signing his own pleadings, as presently allowed by the Rules.
We answer the query in the negative.As the requirement is directed against lawyers only and the
purpose for which is to screen bogus lawyers and protect the public from them, the requirement and
the consequent penalties therefore cannot be construed as precluding a party who is not a lawyer from
signing a pleading himself as presently allowed by the Rules.
xxx
The Court Resolved, upon recommendation of the Office of the Bar Confidant, to GRANT the request
of the Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and the Sangguniang Panlalawigan
of Ilocos Norte to require all lawyers to indicate their Roll of Attorneys Number in all papers or
pleadings submitted to the various judicial or quasi-judicial bodies in addition to the requirement of
indicating the current Professional Tax Receipt (PTR) and the IBP Official Receipt or Life Member
Number.
All pleadings, motions and papers filed in court, whether personally or by mail, which do not bear
counsel's Roll of Attorneys Number as herein required may not be acted upon by the court, without
prejudice to whatever disciplinary action the court may take against the erring counsel who shall
likewise be required to comply with the requirement within five (5) days from notice.Failure to
comply with such requirement shall be a ground for further disciplinary sanction and for contempt of
court.

Parts of a Pleading
1. Caption
2. Body
a) Designation – Ex. Complaint
b) Allegations
c) Relief
d) Date of pleading
3. Signature and address
4. Verification
a) Simply intended to secure an assurance that the allegations in the pleading are true and
correct and not the product of the imagination or a matter of speculation, and that the
pleading is filed in good faith (Tan v Ballena)
b) How done: By an affidavit that the affiant has read the pleading and that the allegations
therein are true and correct of his personal knowledge or based on authentic records (LDP
Marketing Inc. v Monter)
5. Certification
a) Prohibit and penalize the evils of forum shopping
b) Rooted in the principle that a party litigant shall not be allowed to pursue simultaneous
remedies in different fora, as this practice is detrimental to an orderly judicial procedure.
c) How done: A certification under oath by the plaintiff or principal party in the complaint or
other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief or in a sworn certification annexed
thereto and simultaneously filed therewith
1. That he has not theretofore commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same
issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his knowledge,
no such other action or claim is pending therein;
2. If there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of the present status
thereof, and
3. If he should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is
pending, he shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court wherein his
aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been filed.
Example of Pleading

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
QUEZON CITY BRANCH ____

Alexyss Anne P. Alip,

Plaintiff,

- versus - Civil Case No. ______

Alexyss Anne P. Alip,

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

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, by undersigned counsel, respectfully states that:

1. Plaintiff, of legal age, a Filipino citizen, is a resident of _____. She may be served with
summons, pleadings and processes through undersigned counsel;
2. Defendant, of legal age, a Filipino citizen, a resident of ______, where he may be served with
summons, pleadings and processes.;
3. On February 14, 2017, the defendant negligently backed up his Porsche vehicle into plaintiffs
Innova vehicle at UP College of Law parking lot, causing actual damages in the amount of three
hundred fifty thousand pesos (P350,000);
4. The parties have failed to settle amicably with the Lupong Tagapamayapa of Brgy. (where UP
is). Certificate to File Action is attached herewith as Annex A.

PRAYER

Wherefore, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that judgment be rendered in favour of the
plaintiff, and that the defendant be ordered to pay the plaintiff three hundred fifty thousand pesos
(P350,000) in actual damages.

Other reliefs just and equitable in the premises are likewise prayed for.

February 20, 2017 Cainta for Quezon City

Atty. Alexyss Anne P. Alip

Counsel for the Plaintiff
PTR No. 1234567: 01-02-03 BC
IBP No. 123456: 01-02-03 BC
Roll No. 12345: 01-02-03: Manila
MCLE No. 12345: 01-02-03
24 Dollar St.
09158055338
alexyss.alip@gmail.com
a. Forum shopping
Defined
 Occurs when a party attempts to have his action tried in a particular court or jurisdiction where
he feels he will receive the most favorable judgment or verdict

How committed
1. Filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and with the same prayer, the previous
case not having been resolved yet (where the ground for dismissal is litis pendentia)
2. Filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and the same prayer, the previous case
having been finally resolved (where the ground for dismissal is res judicata); and
3. Filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action, but with different prayers

Summary of Express Rules on Certification of Non-Forum Shopping

Forum Shopping None Non-Deliberate Wilfull and Deliberate

Dismissal on motion and
No Certificate
hearing without prejudice
Dismissal on motion and Summary dismissal with
hearing without prejudice; prejudice; Direct
False Certification/
Indirect contempt; contempt; Administrative
Non-Compliance
Administrative case; case; Criminal Case
Criminal case

Ayala Land v Valisno

2000 Ynares-Santiago
Summary:
Ayala Land owned several contiguous properties and later became aware that there were
adverse claims over the lands, one of which is Valisno's claim. Ayala Land then instituted 8 actions to
quiet title per TCT. 5 of these were instituted against Valisno. The latter likewise instituted an action
against Ayala Land. Both accused the other of forum shopping. CA eventually ruled against Ayala Land
and found that there was forum shopping on the latter's part.
Court reversed and set aside the decision of the CA and ordered that the case be revived and
consolidated. The Court found that:
 There must be between the first and second actions identity of parties, subject matter, and cause
of action
◦ Different titles → different CoA → judgment in one case will not affect the others

Doctrine:
Forum shopping; elements
Forum shopping exists when the elements of litis pendentia/auter action pendant are present or where a
final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in another. Litis pendentia requires the
concurrence of the following requisites:
 Identity of parties, or at least such parties as those representing the same interests in both
actions;
 Identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the reliefs being founded on the same facts;
and
 Identity with respect to the two preceding particulars in the two cases, such that any judgment
that may be rendered in the pending case, regardless of which party is successful, would amount
 to res adjudicata in the other case

Res Judiciata; elements

 The former judgment must be final;
 The court which rendered judgment must have jurisdiction over the parties and the subject
matter;
 It must be a judgment on the merits; and
 There must be between the first and second actions identity of parties, subject matter, and cause
of action

Sevilleja v Laggui
2001 Gonzaga-Reyes, J.
Summary:
Sevilleja was proclaimed winner of the local election for mayor in Sta. Teresita, Cagayan.
Garcia, his rival, filed an election protest which was raffled off to the sala of Judge Laggui, who later
voluntarily inhibited himself as the wife of Garcia was the judge's legal researcher. The case was then
re-raffled to the sala of Judge Agcaoili, Branch 8. Judge Agcaoili rendered a decision in favor of Garcia
and declared the latter to be the winner. Sevilleja filed a notice of appeal and Garcia filed a motion for
execution of judgment, however Judge Agcaoili was absent and an SC administrative order designated
Judge Laggui as acting presiding judge of Branch 8. Judge Laggui then granted the motion for
execution of judgment. Sevilleja filed and administrative case with the court and a complaint against
Judge Laggui with the ombudsman.
The Court ruled in favour of Sevilleja and likewise held that there was no forum shopping.

Doctrine:
PNB Republic Bank vs. Court of Appeals,8 has already ruled that a case pending before the
Ombudsman cannot be considered for purposes of determining if there was forum-shopping, as the
power of the Ombudsman is only investigative in character and its resolution cannot constitute a valid
and final judgment because its duty is to file the appropriate case before the Sandiganbayan.

Altres v Empleo
10 Dec 2008, Carpio-Morales, J.
Summary:
Mayor Empleo issued an order announcing vacancies in certain position in the municipal
government for which some of the petitioners have been appointed for. However, the appointments
could not proceed as there was no certification as to the availability of funds for the salaries of the
would be government employees. Mayor Empleo and the appointees then filed a case for mandamus in
order to compel the city accountant to furnish the certification. Respondents assailed the petition as
defective as the petitioners failed to comply with the requirements on verification and certification as
not all petitioners have signed the verification and certification. Petitioners answered that some of the
parties thus named could no longer be contacted and some have already been employed elsewhere.
The Court ruled in favor of the petitioners but ordered the non-signing petitioners to be dropped
from the case. As regards the merits, the case has become moot and academic as CSC dispparoved the
appointments. Nonetheless, the Court held that the city accountant and not the city treasurer is the
proper party in this case (LGC Sec. 474 (b)(4)).

Doctrine:
GR: All petitioners must sign the certificate of non-forum shopping as the persons who have signed the
same cannot be presumed to have the personal knowledge of the other non-signing petitioners with
respect to the filing or non-filing of any action or claim the same as or similar to the current petition.
EXC: Petitioners show reasonable cause for failure to personally sign the certification + convince the
court that the outright dismissal of the case would defeat the administration of justice.

Vda. De Formoso v PNB

1 Jun 2011
Summary:
Nellie and her late husband obtained a loan from PNB, secured by a real estate mortgage. After
some time, Nellie and her and children executed an SPA in favor or Malcaba, authorizing him to secure
all papers and documents pertaining to the loan with real estate mortgage. The Fromosos eventually
sold the mortgaged real properties to Malcaba. Malcaba went to PNB to pay the loan and satisfy the
obligation of the Formosos. PNB refused the tender of payment. This prompted Petitioners to filed a
complaint for specific performance against PNB, for it to accept the payment tendered. RTC ruled in
favor of Petitioners. However, Petitioners still filed a Petition for relief. RTC, denied the petition.
Petitioners appealed to the CA but the latter denied the petition for failure to comply with rule on the
Verification and Certification of Non-Forum Shopping.

Doctrine:
The certification against forum shopping must be signed by all the plaintiffs or petitioners in a
case; otherwise, those who did not sign will be dropped as parties to the case. Under reasonable or
justifiable circumstances, however, as when the plaintiffs or petitioners share a common interest and
invoke a common cause of action or defense, the signature of only one of them xxx substantially
conforms with the Rule

Rules on Non-Forum Shopping Certification

1) As to verification, non-compliance therewith or a defect therein does not necessarily render the
pleading fatally defective. The Court may order its submission or correction or act on the
pleading if the attending circum-stances are such that strict compliance with the Rule may be
dispensed with in order that the ends of justice may be served thereby.
2) Verification is deemed substantially complied with when one who has ample knowledge to
swear to the truth of the allegations in the complaint or petition signs the verification, and when
matters alleged in the petition have been made in good faith or are true and correct.
3) As to certification against forum shopping, non-compliance therewith or a defect therein, unlike
in verification, is generally not curable by its subsequent submission or correction thereof,
unless there is a need to relax the Rule on the ground of “substantial compliance” or presence of
“special circumstances or compelling rea-sons.”
4) The certification against forum shopping must be signed by all the plaintiffs or petitioners in a
case; oth-erwise, those who did not sign will be dropped as parties to the case. Under reasonable
or justifiable circumstanc-es, however, as when all the plaintiffs or petitioners share a common
interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense, the signature of only one of them in
the cer-tification against forum shopping substantially complies with the Rule.
5) Finally, the certification against forum shop-ping must be executed by the party-pleader, not by
his counsel. If, however, for reasonable or justifiable reasons, the party-pleader is unable to
sign, he must execute a Special Power of Attorney designating his counsel of re-cord to sign on
his behalf’

b. Corporations
 A juridical entity, unlike a natural person, can only perform physical acts through properly
 delegated individuals. The certification against forum shopping where the plaintiff or a principal
party is a juridical entity like a corporation, may be executed by properly authorized persons.
This person may be the lawyer of a corporation. As long as he is duly authorized by the
corporation and has personal knowledge of the facts required to be disclosed in the certification
against forum shopping, the certification may be signed by the authorized lawyer

BA Savings v Sia
2000, Panganiban, J.
Summary:
BA filed a Petition for Certiorari with certification on anti-forum shopping was signed by its
counsel. BA was able to show that its Board of Directors authorized its lawyers to sign, execute and
deliver the certificate of non-forum shopping. The Petition was denied on the ground that Supreme
Court Revised Circular No. 28-91 requires that it is the petitioner, not the counsel, who must certify
under oath to all of the acts and undertakings required therein.
The Court ruled in favour of BA and held that all acts within the powers of a corporation may
be performed by agents of its selection. Here, the corporations board of directors issued a resolution
specifically authorizing its lawyer to acts as their agents in any action or proceeding before the
Supreme Court. The requirement of the Circular cannot be imposed on artificial persons, like
corporations, for the simple reason that they cannot personally do the task themselves.

Doctrine:
The certificate of non-forum shopping may be signed, for and on behalf of a corporation, by a
specifically authorized lawyer who has personal knowledge of the facts required to be disclosed in such
document. Unlike natural persons, corporations may perform physical actions only through properly
delegated individuals; namely, its officers and/or agents.

Cagayan Valley Drug v CIR

13 Feb 2008, Velasco
Summary:
Petitioner granted 20% sales discounts to qualified senior citizens on purchases of medicine
pursuant to RA No. 7432 and its implementing rules and regulations. In compliance with Revenue
Regulation No. 2-94, petitioner treated the 20% sales discounts granted to qualified senior citizens in
1995 as deductions from the gross sales in order to arrive at the net sales, instead of treating them as tax
credit asprovided by Sec. 4 of RA 7432. Petitioner later filed with the Bureau of Internal Revenue
(BIR) a claim for tax refund/tax credit of the full amount of the 20% sales discount it granted to senior
citizens for the year 1995, allegedly totaling to PhP 123,083 in accordance with Sec. 4 of RA 7432. The
BIR’s inaction on petitioner’s claim for refund/tax credit compelled petitioner to file a petition for
review before the CTA. The CTA rendered a Decision dismissing the petition for review for lack of
merit. Aggrieved, petitioner elevated the matter before the CA.
The CA issued the assailed Resolution dismissing the petition on procedural grounds. The CA
held that theperson who signed the verification and certification of absence of forum shopping, a
certain Jacinto J. Concepcion, President of petitioner, failed to adduce proof that he was duly
authorized by the board of directors to do so.
The SC held that there was substantial compliance as the requisite board resolution was
submitted, albeit belatedly, that the president is in a position to verify the truthfulness and correctness
of the allegations in the petition and that president of petitioner has signed the complaint before the
CTA. The Court likewise ruled that petitioner is entitled to a tax credit and not a tax refund.
Doctrine:
A corporation has a separate and distinct personality from its directors and officers and can only
exercise its corporate powers through the board of directors. Thus, it is clear that an individual
corporate officer cannot solely exercise any corporate power pertaining to the corporation without
authority from the board of directors.
Test: WON the authorized corporate officers or representatives of the corporation who signs the
verification or certificate against forum shopping are in a position to verify the truthfulness and
correctness of the allegations in the petition

The following officials or employees of the company can sign the verification and certification without
need of a board resolution:
1. Chairperson of the Board
2. President of a corporation
3. General Manager or Acting General Manager
4. Personnel Officer
5. Employment Specialist in a labor case

MC Engineering v NLRC
2001, Gonzaga-Reyes, J.
Summary:
A labor dispute arose between Aristotle Baldameca, principal, Hanil and employment agency,
MCEI. The NLRC ruled in favour of Baldameca, which ruling was appealed to the CA by Hanil and
MCEI. The CA however dismissed the petition for failure to comply with the requisite certificate of
non-forum shopping as only MCEI's representative signed and the failure to explain why there was no
personal service of the pleading.
The Court ruled that there was substantial complaince as regards the certificate of non-forum
shopping as MCEI is Hanil's agent.

Doctrine:
Considering that the local private employment agency may sue on behalf of its foreign principal
on the basis of its contractual undertakings submitted to POEA, there is no reason why said agency
cannot likewise sign or execute a certification of non-forum shopping for its own purposes and/or on
behalf of its foreign principal. It is the local private employment agency who is in the best position to
know of the matters required in a certification of non-forum shopping.

LDP Marketing, Inc. v Monter

25 Jan 2006, Carpio-Morales, J.
Summary:
An illegal dismissal case was filed by Monter against LDP Marketing, Inc and its VP, Ma.
Lourdes dela Peña. Monter was able to obtain a favourable ruling, which LDP appealed from to the
CA. The CA denied the petition on the ground of failure to attach to the petition a copy of the company
board resolution authorizing said Ma. Lourdes Dela Peña to sign the said Verification/ Certification of
non-forum shopping for and in behalf of petitioner corporation. A motion for reconsideration was filed
by LDP to which they attached the Secretary's Certificate which gave authorization to the VP. The CA
dismissed the same. The SC ruled in favour of LDP.

Doctrine:
GR: Certifications against forum shopping signed by a person on behalf of a corporation which are
unaccompanied by proof that said signatory is authorized to file a petition on behalf of the corporation
shall be sufficient ground for dismissal
EXC: Special circumstances or compelling reasons that justified the relaxation of the rule requiring
verification and certification on non-forum shopping.

South Cotabato Communications Corp v Sto. Tomas

15 Dec 2010, Leonardo-De Castro
Summary:
An inspection was conducted at DXCP Radio Station and several labor standards violations
were observed. The company was given 5 days from notice of the results of the inspection to remedy
the violations. The company failed to remedy the situation and was ordered to pay its 7 affected
employees about roughly P700k. The labor dispute evenutally reached the CA but the CA dismissed the
same due to procedural infirmites as the President, Benzonan, was not authorized by a board resolution
to sign the certification. The company subsequently submitted the board resolution authrozing the
President to sign but the same was dismissed. The Court ruled in favour of the company.

Doctrine:
A President of a corporation, among other enumerated corporate officers and employees, can
sign the verification and certification against of nonforum shopping in behalf of the said corporation
without the benefit of a board resolution.

Swedish Match Philippines, Inc. v Treasurer of City of Manila

3 Jul 2013, Sereno, CJ
Summary:
Swedish filed a Petitoin for Refund of Taxes but the same was dismissed for failure of petitoiner
to plead the latter's capacity to sue and to state the authority of Tiarra T. Batilaran-Beleno who
executed the verification and certification of non-forum shopping as well as finding that there was no
double taxation that would merit the refund of taxes prayed for.
The Court ruled for Swedish as a Secretary's Certificate was later submitted which authorized
and ratified the act of Ms. Beleno as its Finance Director. Furthermore, the nature of the position of Ms.
Beleno is relevant to the determination of her capability and sufficiency to verify the truthfulness and
correctness of the allegations in the petition.

Doctrine:
The requirement of verification is simply a condition affecting the form of the pleading and
noncompliance does not necessarily render the pleading fatally defective.

c. Individuals

Santos v CA
2001, Bellosillo, J.
Summary:
A case was filed against Pepsi Cola by its former employees, which alleged that the redundancy
was apparent and not real and that they were thus illegally dismissed. The LA and NLRC dismissed the
complaint. The petitioners appealed to the CA but the same was summarily dismissed for failure to
comply with the required certificate of non-forum shopping as it was only the petitioners' counsel who
signed instead of the petitioners themselves. Furthermore, there was failure to indicate the dates when
the NLRC decision.
The Court affirmed the same and said that ruling in BA Savings v Sia cannot be applied as that
case involved a juridical person, whereas here all the petitioners are natural persons.
Doctrine:
There is substantial compliance when a petitioner's counsel executes verification for his client
but the same does not hold for the certification of non-forum shopping. The certification must be made
by petitioner himself and not by counsel since it is petitioner who is in the best position to know
whether he has previously commenced any similar action involving the same issues in any other
tribunal or agency. An authority given to the counsel to sign in behalf of the petitioner must have a
reasonable justification as to why the petitioner cannot personally do the same.
Essential dates: First, the date when notice of the judgment or final order or Resolution was
received; second, when a motion for new trial or reconsideration was filed; and third, when notice of
the denial thereof was received.

Fiel v Kris Security Systems Inc.

3 Apr 2003, Vitug, J.
Summary:

Doctrine:

Hamilton v Levy
2001
Summary:
Doctrine:
The fact that the parties were abroad at a time when the petition was filed, was considered a
reasonable cause to exempt the parties from compliance with the requirement that they personally
execute the certification against forum shopping

Cavile v Cavile
2003
Summary:
Doctrine:
There was substantial compliance with the Rules where only one petitioner signed the
certification against forum shopping in behalf of all the other petitioners being all relatives and
coowners of the properties in dispute, and who shared a common interest in them, had a common
defense in the complaint for partition, filed the petition collectively, and raised only one argument to
defend their rights over the properties in question.

3. Alleging Causes of Action

Rule 8 Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings

Section 1 In general
Every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct statement of
the ultimate facts on which the party pleading relies for his claim or defense, as the case may be,
omitting the statement of mere evidentiary facts.

If a defense relied on is based on law, the pertinent provisions thereof and their applicability to him
shall be clearly and concisely stated.
Section 2 Alternative causes of action or defenses
A party may set forth two or more statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically,
either in one cause of action or defense or in separate causes of action or defenses. When two or more
statements are made in the alternative and one of them if made independently would be sufficient, the
pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency of one or more of the alternative statements.

Section 5 Fraud, mistake, condition of the mind

In all averments of fraud or mistake the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake must be stated
with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, or other condition of the mind of a person may be
averred generally

Section 6 Judgment
In pleading a judgment or decision of a domestic or foreign court, judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal, or
of a board or officer, it is sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without setting forth matter
showing jurisdiction to render it.

Section 9 Official document or act

In pleading an official document or official act, it is sufficient to aver that the document was issued or
the act done in compliance with law.

Rule 16 Motion to Dismiss

Section 1 Grounds
Within the time for but before filing the answer to the complaint or pleading asserting a claim, a
motion to dismiss may be made on any of the following grounds:
(g) That the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action;

Tantuico v Republic
1991
Summary:
Doctrine:
The ultimate facts are the important and substantial facts which form the basis of the primary right of
the plaintiff and which make up the wrongful act or omission of the defendant. The ultimate facts do
not refer to the details of probative matter or to the particulars of evidence by which the material
elements are to be established. They are the principal, determinate, constitutive facts, upon the
existence of which, the entire cause of action rests.

4. Alleging Capacity to Sue

Rule 8 Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings

Section 4 Capacity
Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or be sued or the authority of a party to sue or be sued in a
representative capacity or the legal existence of an organized association of person that is made a
party, must be averred. A party desiring to raise an issue as to the legal existence of any party or the
capacity of any party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity, shall do so by specific denial,
which shall include such supporting particulars as are peculiarly within the pleader's knowledge

Rule 16 Motion to Dimiss

Section 1 Grounds
Within the time for but before filing the answer to the complaint or pleading asserting a claim, a
motion to dismiss may be made on any of the following grounds:
(d) That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue

5. Alleging Compliance with Conditions Precedent

Rule 8 Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings

Section 3 Conditions precedent
In any pleading a general averment of the performance or occurrence of all conditions precedent shall
be sufficient.

Rule 16 Motion to Dimiss

Section 1 Grounds
Within the time for but before filing the answer to the complaint or pleading asserting a claim, a
motion to dismiss may be made on any of the following grounds:

(j) That a condition precedent for filin the claim has not been complied with

Family Code
Art. 151
No suit between members of the same family shall prosper unless it should appear from the verified
complaint or petition that earnest efforts toward a compromise have been made, but that the same
have failed. If it is shown that no such efforts were in fact made, the same case must be dismissed.

This rules shall not apply to cases which may not be the subject of compromise under the Civil Code.

Heirs of Favis, Sr. v Gonzales

15 Jan 2014
Summary:
Doctrine:

Gayon v Gayon
26 Nov 1970
Summary:
Doctrine:

Sps. Hontiveros v RTC

29 Jun 1999
Summary:
Doctrine:

6. Striking Out
Rule 8 Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings
Section 12 Striking out of pleading or matter contained therein
Upon motion made by a party before responding to a pleading or, if no responsive pleading is
permitted by these Rules, upon motion made by a party within 20 days after the service of the
pleading upon him, or upon the court's own initiative at any time, the court may order any pleading to
be stricken out or that any sham or false, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter be
stricken out therefrom.

B. Answer
1. General

Rule 6 Kinds of Pleadings

Section 4 Answer
An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth his defenses.

Rule 11 When to File Responsive Pleadings

Section 1 Answer to the complaint
The defendant shall file his answer to the complaint within 15 days after service of summons, unless a
different period is fixed by the court.

Section 2 Answer of a defendant foreign private juridical entity

Where the defendant is a foreign private juridical entity and service of summons is made on the
government official designated by law to receive the same, the answer shall be filed within 30 days
after receipt of summons by such entity.

Section 11 Extension of time to plead

Upon motion and on such terms as may be just, the court may extend the time to plead provided in
these Rules.
The court may also, upon like terms, allow an answer or other pleading to be filed after the time fixed
by these Rules.

Rule 22 Computation of Time

Section 1 How to compute time
In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by these Rules, or by order of the court, or by
any applicable statute, the day of the act or event from which the designated period of time begins to
run is to be excluded and the date of performance included. If the last day of the period, as thus
computed, falls on a Saturday a Sunday, or a legal holiday in the place where the court sits, the time
shall not run until the next working day.

Section 2 Effect of interruption

Should an act be done which effectively interrupts the running of the period, the allowable period after
such interruption shall start to run on the day after notice of the cessation of the cause thereof.

The day of the act that caused the interruption shall be excluded in the computation of the period.
 2. Alleging Defenses

Rule 6 Kinds of Pleadings

Section 5 Defenses
Defenses may either be negative or affirmative.

(a) A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts alleged in the pleading of the
claimant essential to his cause or causes of action.

(b) An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically admitting the
material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by
him. The affirmative defenses include fraud, statute of limitations, release, payment, illegality, statute
of frauds, estoppel, former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other matter by way of
confession and avoidance.

Rule 8 Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings

Section 2 Alternative causes of action or defenses
A party may set forth two or more statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically,
either in one cause of action or defense or in separate causes of action or defenses. When two or more
statements are made in the alternative and one of them if made independently would be sufficient, the
pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency of one or more of the alternative statements.
Section 7 Action or defense based on document
Whenever an action or defense is based upon a written instrument or document, the substance of such
instrument or document shall be set forth in the pleading, and the original or a copy thereof shall be
attached to the pleading as an exhibit, which shall be deemed to be a part of the pleading, or said copy
may with like effect be set forth in the pleading.

Section 8 How to contest such documents

When an action or defense is founded upon a written instrument, copied in or attached to the
corresponding pleading as provided in the preceding section, the genuineness and due execution of the
instrument shall be deemed admitted unless the adverse party, under oath specifically denies them, and
sets forth what he claims to be the facts, but the requirement of an oath does not apply when the
adverse party does not appear to be a party to the instrument or when compliance with an order for an
inspection of the original instrument is refused.

Section 10 Specific denial

A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and,
whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his
denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of an averment, he shall specify so much of it as
is true and material and shall deny only the remainder. Where a defendant is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made to the complaint, he
shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a denial

Section 11 Allegations not specifically denied deemed admitted

Material averment in the complaint, other than those as to the amount of unliquidated damages, shall
be deemed admitted when not specifically denied. Allegations of usury in a complaint to recover
usurious interest are deemed admitted if not denied under oath.

Rule 9 Effect of Failure to Plead

Section 1 Defenses and objections not pleaded
Defenses and objections not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived.
However, when it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that the court has no
jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is another action pending between the same parties for
the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior judgment or by statute of limitations, the court
shall dismiss the claim.

Rule 16 Motion to Dismiss

Section 6 Pleading grounds as affirmative defenses
If no motion to dismiss has been filed, any of the grounds for dismissal provided for in this Rule may
be pleaded as an affirmative defense in the answer and, in the discretion of the court, a preliminary
hearing may be had thereon as if a motion to dismiss had been filed.

The dismissal of the complaint under this section shall be without prejudice to the prosecution in the
same or separate action of a counterclaim pleaded in the answer.

Convets Inc. v National Dev't Corp

28 Feb 1958
Summary:
Doctrine:

Philippine American General Insurance v Sweet lines

5 Aug 1992
Summary:
Doctrine:

Sps Abrajano v Heirs of Salas, Jr.

16 Feb 2006
Summary:
Doctrine:

Associated Bank v Sps Montano

16 Oct 2009
Summary:
Doctrine:

Sun Bros v Caluntad

30 Apr 1966
Summary:
Doctrine:
Toribio v Bidin
17 Jan 1985
Summary:
Doctrine:

3. Bill of Particulars

Rule 12 Bill of Particulars

Section 1 When applied for; purpose
Before responding to a pleading, a party may move for a definite statement or for a bill of particulars
of any matter which is not averted with sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable him properly
to prepare his responsive pleading. If the pleading is a reply, the motion must be filed within 10 days
from service thereof. Such motion shall point out the defects complained of, the paragraphs wherein
they are contained, and the details desired.

Section 2 Action by the court

Upon the filing of the motion, the clerk of court must immediately bring it to the attention of the court
which may either deny or grant it outright, or allow the parties the opportunity to be heard.

Section 3 Compliance with order

If the motion is granted, either in whole or in part, the compliance therewith must be effected within
10 days from notice of the order, unless a different period is fixed by the court. The bill of particulars
or a more definite statement ordered by the court may be filed either in a separate or in an amended
pleading, serving a copy thereof on the adverse party.

Section 4 Effect of non-compliance

If the order is not obeyed, or in case of insufficient compliance therewith, the court may order the
striking out of the pleading or the portions thereof to which the order was directed or make such other
order as it deems just.

Section 5 Stay of period to file responsive pleading

After service of the bill of particulars or of a more definite pleading, or after notice of denial of his
motion, the moving party may file his responsive pleading within the period to which he was entitled
at the time of filing his motion, which shall not be less than 5 days in any event.

Section 6 Bill a part of pleading

A bill of particulars becomes part of the pleading for which it is intended.

Tantuico v Republic
1991
Summary:
Doctrine:

4. Default

Rule 9 Effect of Failure to Plead

Section 3 Default; declaration of
If the defending party fails to answer within the time allowed therefor, the court shall, upon motion of
the claiming party with notice to the defending party, and proof of such failure, declare the defending
party in default. Thereupon, the court shall proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such
relief as his pleading may warrant, unless the court in its discretion requires the claimant to submit
evidence. Such reception of evidence may be delegated to the clerk of court.

(a) Effect of order of default. — A party in default shall be entitled to notice of subsequent
proceedings but not to take part in the trial.
(b) Relief from order of default. — A party declared in default may at any time after notice
thereof and before judgment file a motion under oath to set aside the order of default upon
proper showing that his failure to answer was due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
negligence and that he has a meritorious defense. In such case, the order of default may be set
aside on such terms and conditions as the judge may impose in the interest of justice.
(c) Effect of partial default. — When a pleading asserting a claim states a common cause of
action against several defending parties, some of whom answer and the others fail to do so, the
court shall try the case against all upon the answers thus filed and render judgment upon the
evidence presented.
(d) Extent of relief to be awarded. — A judgment rendered against a party in default shall not
exceed the amount or be different in kind from that prayed for nor award unliquidated
damages.
(e) Where no defaults allowed. — If the defending party in an action for annulment or
declaration of nullity of marriage or for legal separation fails to answer, the court shall order
the prosecuting attorney to investigate whether or not a collusion between the parties exists,
and if there is no collusion, to intervene for the State in order to see to it that the evidence
submitted is not fabricated.

Cavil v Florendo
9 Oct 1987
Summary:
Doctrine:

Garcia v CA
1992
Summary:
Doctrine:

Filinvest v CA
1990
Summary:
Doctrine:

Talsan v Baliwag
8 Jul 1999
Summary:
Doctrine:
Ortero v Tan
15 Aug 2012
Summary:
Doctrine:
 CHAPTERS 3&4 OF THE TALENT CODE

Chapter 3 The Brontes, the Z-Boys and the Renaissance

Excellence is a habit~Aristotle

The Girls from Nowhere

 Charlotte, Emily and Anne Bronte
 Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights and the Tenant of Wildfell Hall
 Elizabeth Gaskell 1857 Life of Charlotte Bronte Haworth, West Yorkshire
 Juliet Barker Bronte Parsonage Museum
 Skill: insulation that wraps neural circuits and grows according to certain signals

The Myelin Skaters

 Venice, California
 Bahne-Cadillac Skateboard Championship, Del Mar, California 1975
 Empty swimming pool, Bel Air and Beverly Hills
 Skip Engblom, de facto mentor
 Skateboard Kings 1978

The Michelangelo System

 Carnegie Mellon University Statistician, David Banks The Problem of Excess Genius
 Genius appeared in clusters: Athens 440 BC to 380 BC; Florence 1440 to 1490; London 1570 to
1640
 Conventional wisdom explanation for Renaissance
◦ x Prosperity: provided money and markets to support art
◦ x Peace: Provided stability to seek artistic and philosphical progress
◦ x Freedom: Liberarted artists from state or religious control
◦ Social mobility: Allowed talented poor people to enter the arts
◦ Paradigm Thing: Brought new perspectives and mediums that created a wave of originality
and expression
 Paul Johnson: Genius suddenly comes to life and speaks out of a vacuum and then it is silent,
equally mysteriously
 Craft guilds: powerful social invetion; associations of weavers, painters, gold-smiths, and th
elike who organized themselves to regulate competition and control quality
 Apprentice system: Boys around 7 years of age were sent to live with masters for 5-10 years
 da Vinci under Verrocchio, Verrocchio under Donatello, Donatello under Ghiberti;
Michelangelo under Ghirlandaio, Ghirlandaio under Baldovinetti
 Michelangelo: Bertoldo, Lorenzo de Medici, Pieta at 24
 Bruce Cole The Renaissance Artist at Work

Meet Mr. Myelin

 George Bartzokis Neurology Professor at UCLA
 20% more myelin than monkeys
 Breast-fed babies have higher IQs: Fatty acids in breast milk are the building blocks of myelin
◦ DHA Fatty acids, omega-3 fatty acids
 Michael Jordan retired because myelin started to break down with age
 Cro-Magnon surived because they had more myelin
  Horses walk immediately after being born while humans take a year because horses are born
with muscles already myelinated
 Myelin beings: offers a potentially revolutionary alternative to the traditional way one thinks
about skill, talent and human nature itself
 Traditional: nature (genes: cosmic cards dealt) + nurture (environment: game in which they're
played)
 Genes: Evolution-tested instruction books that build immensely complicated machines
 Guided by preset neural programs, humans navigate toward a solution
 Question of acquiring higher skills is a question of design strategy
 Strategy 1: Genes to prewire for the skill
◦ Biologically expensive: takes resources and time
◦ Gamble with fate
 Strategy 2: Genes build millions of tiny broadband installers and distributing them throughout
the circuits of the brain
◦ Whatever circuits fired the most, and most urgently, are the ones where the installers will go
◦ Broadband = mylein; Installers = Oligodendrocytes

Chapter 4 The 3 Rules of Deep Practice

Try again. Fail again. Fail better. ~Samuel Beckett

Adriaan de Groot and the HSE

 Holy Shit Effect: Heady mix of disbelief, adminiration, and envy we feel when talent suddenly
appears out of nowhere; feeling of seeing talent bloom in people who we thought are like us
 De Groot: Dutch psychologist, played chess in spare time,
 Chunking: Skill that consists of identifying important elements and grouping them into a
meaningful framework
 Chunking dimensions
1. Look at the task as a whole
2. Divide into smallest possible chunks
3. Play with time, slowing the action down, then speeding it up, to learn its inner
architecture
Absorb the Whole Thing
 Carolyn Xie: 8 yo, tennis, Roger Federer
 Ray LaMotagne: Shoe factory worker from Maine, 22, singing
 Spartak Tennis Club Moscow: Anna Kournikova, Marat Safin, Larisa Preobrazhenskaya, 77
◦ Imitatsiya: Rallying in slow motion with an imaginary ball
◦ Tekhnika-Technique is everything. If you begin playing without technique, it's a big
mistake.
Break it into Chunks
 Meadowmount School of Music, NY: Violin teacher Ivan Galamian, Pinchas Zuckerman
◦ David Ramos 16, Tina Chen Korngold violin
Slow it Down
 Owen Carman: glacial pace
 Why it works
◦ Allows you to attend more closely to errors, creating a higher degree of precision with each
firing—and when it comes to growing myelin, precision is everything.
▪ Tom Martinez: "It's not how fast you can do it. It's how slow you can do it correctly."
 ◦ Helps the practicer to develop something even more important: a working perception of the
skill's internal blueprints—the shape and rhythm of the interlocking skill circuits.
 Barry Zimmerman, Pyschology professor City Univeristy of NY
◦ Self-regulation: Observing, judging and strategizing one's own performance; coaching
oneself
◦ Worked with Anastasia Kitsantas of George Mason Uni
◦ Goals, strategy, self-monitoring process, adaptation
 John Henry Crawford 14 cellist

Rule Two: Repeat it!

 Vladimir Horowitz: virtuoso pianist “If I skip practice for one day, I notice. If I skip practice for
two days, my wife notices. If I skip for three days, the world notices.”
 Repeatition is invaluable and irreplaceable
 Robert Lansdorp: Tennis coach, Pete Sampras, Maria Sharapova

Rule Three: Learn to Feel It

 How to practice by Skye Carman
 Get a balance point where you can sense the errors when they come. To avoid the mistakes, first
you have to feel them immediately.
 Martha Graham: Divine dissatisfaction
 Glenn Kurtz Practicing
 Robert Bjork -Sweet Spot: Productive, uncomfortable terrain located just beyond our current
abilities, where our reach exceeds our grasp
 Deep practice: Seeking out a particular struggle
1. Pick a target
2. Reach for it
3. Evaluate the gap between the target and the reach
4. Return to step 1
 Staggering baby
 Japanese 44% struggling; you don't learn by gliding
 To get good, it's helpful to be willing, or even enthusiastic, about being bad
 Baby steps are the royal road to skill
 5. Counter-claims

Rule 6
Section 2
Section 6
Section 7
Section 9

Rule 9
Section 2

Rule 11
Section 4
Section 8
Section 9
Section 10

Rule 16
Section 6

Rule 17
Section 2

NCC
Art. 1283

RSC
Section 13

Rules on Special Proceedings

Section 3 (A)
Section 5

AM No. 04-2-04-SC
OCA Circular 096-09

6. Cross-claims
7. Third Party Complaint

C. Reply
D. Intervention