CIVIL PROCEDURE
1. X filed a complaint against Y who filed an answer with
counterclaim. X did not answer the counterclaim, hence
he was declared in default. Can he still present evidence
on his cause of action? Why?
Yes, because a default in counterclaim does not divest him of a
standing in court. This is different from default in the main action
(Navarro vs. Bello)
2. A entered into separate contracts with X, Y, and Z. All the
obligations are now due and demandable. The failed to
pay. Can A sue them in a single complaint?
Yes because the Totality Rule applies even in cases where a
plaintiff has separate causes of action against two or more
defendants. The totality rule applies if: (1) the causes of action
arose out of the same transaction or a series of transactions; and
(2) there is a common question of law and fact among them.
3. A filed a complaint for sum of money against B in the
Metropolitan Trial Court, Manila, seeking for the award of
Three hundred thousand pesos (P300,000.00). B, the
defendant, filed an answer with counterclaim alleging that
A is liable to him in the amount of Five hundred thousand
pesos (P500,000.00). Assume that Judge Pedro Arreola
would hold A liable, how much can be awarded to B by
way of his counterclaim? Why?
The Judge can award the amount of (P400,000.00) only, because
that is the limit of the court’s jurisdiction. When B submitted his
claim against A, he voluntarily submitted the same to the
jurisdiction of the MTC, and he is bound thereby. He is deemed to
have waived the excess of his claim beyond 400,000. It is as if B
set up a counterclaim in the amount of 400,000 (Agustin vs. Baclan
135 SCRA 340 [1985])
4. A filed a suit against B for the recovery of a real property
at the RTC, Manila. During the pendency of the suit, B
sold the land to C, where a title was issued in favor of C.
a. Assume that C came to you for advice whether it is
necessary for him to intervene in the suit to protect
his interest. Advice your client and state the reasons.
I would advice C that there is no need for him to intervene to
protect his interest as a transferee pendente lite. A transferee
pendente lite acquires the property subject to the outcome of the
case. He merely steps into the shoes of the seller. If the court
renders judgment for the seller, he is protected because he
acquired it subject to the outcome of the case. If the judgment is for
the opposing party, he is still protected as he acquired the property
subject to the outcome of the case. He stands exactly in the shoes
of the transferor and is bound by any judgment or decree which
may be rendered for or against the transferor. (Union Bank of the
Philippines vs CA, et al. G.R. 133366, August 5, 1999)
PRELIMS
5. Cause of action vs Right of action, Real action vs.
Personal Action, Action in rem vs action in personam,
Supplemental Pleading vs. Amended Pleading
Cause of action vs Right of action
A cause of action refers to the delict or wrong committed by a
defendant, whereas the right of action refers to the right of the
plaintiff to institute the action.
Real action vs Personal action
Real actions are based on the privity of real estates; while personal
actions are based on privity of contracts or for the recovery of sum
of money.
Action in rem vs Action in personam
An action in rem is one instituted against the whole world while an
action in personam is one filed against a definite defendant. One
distinction is that service of summons is not required in an action in
rem to acquire jurisdiction over the action.
Supplemental pleading vs. Amended pleading
A supplemental pleading does not extinguish the existence of the
original pleading, while an amended pleading takes the place of the
original pleading.
6. A filed a complaint against B who served an answer with
counterclaim. A moved to dismiss the action. Give the
effect of such dismissal.
The dismissal of the action does not carry with it the dismissal of
the counterclaim. This is so because of the rule that if a
counterclaim has been pleaded by the defendant prior to the
service upon him of the plaintiff’s motion for dismissal, the
dismissal shall be limited to the complaint.
The Rules further state that the dismissal shall be without prejudice
to the right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in a
separate action unless within 15 days from notice of the motion he
manifested his preference to have his counterclaim resolved in the
same action (Sec. 2 Rule 17)
7. Compulsory counter claim, example. Permissive
counterclaim, example.
Compulsory counterclaim
Is one which, being cognizable by the regular courts of justice,
arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence
constituting the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim and
does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties of
whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction.
Example
In accion publiciana filed with the RTC where the value of the land
is 1,000,000 and defendant claims for reimbursement of 50,000,
the reimbursement would be considered as compulsory because
the original action was filed with the RTC.
Ponce
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Permissive counterclaim
it does not arise out of, nor is it necessarily connected with the
subject matter of the opposing party’s claim.
Generally, a counterclaim is permissive if any of the elements of a
compulsory counterclaim is absent.
PRELIMS
10. May a defendant file a motion to dismiss after filing an
answer? Is the rule absolute? Explain.
As a rule, no, because under the Rules, within the time for a
pleading a motion to dismiss may be made on any of the grounds
provided for by the Rules. (Sec.1 Rule 16)

Example
A counterclaim for collection of sum of money filed by a defendant
in an action for a claim for damages against him as the latter was
based on the principle of abuse of rights. *Not sure haha
8. Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus
Certiorari
an extraordinary writ annulling or modifying the proceedings of a
tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions when such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or
in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, there being no appeal or
any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary
course of law (Sec. 1, Rule 65).
Prohibition
An extraordinary writ commanding a corporation, board or person,
whether exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions, to
desist from further proceedings when said proceedings are without
or in excess of its jurisdiction, or with abuse of its discretion, there
being no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy
in the ordinary course of law (Sec. 2, Rule 65).
“Within the time for pleading” means within the time to answer.
(Tuason & Co. vs. Rafor, 55 SCRA 478). Since the motion to
dismiss was filed after the answer. it was filed out of time. (Heirs of
Mariano Lagutan vs. Icao, G.R. No. 58057, June 30, 1993). In fact,
after the answer has been filed, the defendant is estopped from
filing a motion to dismiss (Ruiz, Jr. vs. CA, G.R. No. 101566, March
6, 1993)
The rule is not absolute.
The only exceptions to the rule are: (1) where the ground raised is
lack of jurisdiction of the court over the subject matter; (2) where
the complaint does not state a cause of action; (3) prescription; and
(4) where the evidence that would constitute a ground for the
dismissal of the complaint was discovered only during the trial (Phil
Ville Dev. & Housing Corp., et al. vs. Javier, G.R. No. 147738,
December 13, 2005)

Mandamus
an extraordinary writ commanding a tribunal, corporation, board or
person, to do an act required to be done:
a. When he unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which
the law specifically enjoins as a duty, and there is no other plain,
speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law; or
b. When one unlawfully excludes another from the use and
enjoyment of a right or office to which the other is entitled (Sec. 3,
Rule 65).

9. A has a claim of ownership over a real property in the

name of B with an assessed value of Php 19,000. He has
another claim of ownership over another parcel of land
under B’s name with an assessed value of Php 15,000,
both located in the City of Manila. Can A join the two (2)
causes of action and file it with the RTC, Manila? Why?

No, for while he can join causes of action in the RTC, yet, the
requirements is that one of the causes of action must fall within the
jurisdiction of the RTC. Since in both causes of action, the
assessed value of the properties do not exceed Php 50,000, then
jurisdiction lies in the MTC.

Ponce