CIVIL PROCEDURE Cases for November 19, 2011 Estoppel to deny jurisdiction Heirs of Bertuldo Hinog vs.

Melicor, 455 SCRA 460 (2005) Jurisdiction at time of filing of action People vs. Cawaling, 293 SCRA 267 (1998) Quasi-judicial bodies SEC ( Sec. 5.2, RA 8799, Securities Regulation Code) CSC (Magpale vs. CSC, 215 SCRA 398 (1992) HLURB (Sandoval vs. Caneba, 190 SCRA 77 (1991) Commencement of action 1. Condition precedent Katarungang Pambarangay Lumbuan vs. Ronqullo, G.R. No. 155713, May 5, 2006 2. Payment of filing fee Heirs of Bertuldo Hinog vs. Melicor, 455 SCRA 460 (2005), reiterating Sun Insurance Office, Ltd. vs. Asuncion, 170 SCRA 274 (1989) Splitting a cause of action (Secs. 3-4) Joseph vs. Bautista, 170 SCRA 540 (1989) Del Rosario vs Far East Bank and Trust Company, G.R. No. 150134, October 31, 2007 Progressive Development Corp. vs. CA, 301 SCRA 367 (1999) CGR Corporation vs. Treyes, Jr., G.R. No. 170916, April 27, 2007 Enriquez vs. Ramos, 7 SCRA 265 (1963) Joinder of causes of action (Secs. 5-6) Flores vs. Mallare-Phillipps, 144 SCRA 277 (1986) Lack of personality to sue Evangelista vs. Santiago, 475 SCRA 744 (2005) Standing to sue Domingo vs. Carague, 456 SCRA 450 (2005) Representative parties (Sec. 3) Oposa vs. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792 (1993) Indispensable parties (Sec. 7) Domingo vs. Scheer, 421 SCRA 468 (2004) Uy vs. CA, 494 SCRA 535 (2006) Necessary party or proper party (Secs. 8-9) Laperal Devt. Corp. vs. CA, 223 SCRA 261 (1993) Class suits (Sec. 12) Mathay vs. Consolidated Bank, 58 SCRA 559 (1974) Effect of non-substitution of a deceased party Heirs of Bertuldo Hinog vs. Melicor, 455 SCRA 460 (2005) De la Cruz vs. Joaquin, 464 SCRA 576 (2005)

When Rule 4 not applicable (Sec. 4) 1. Where a specific rule or law provides otherwise Diaz vs. Adiong, 219 SCRA 631 (1993) 2. Where parties have validly agreed in writing before filing of the action on exclusive venue thereof Phil. Banking Corp. vs. Tensuan, 228 SCRA 385 (1993) Waiver of improper venue; implied waiver Dacoycoy vs. IAC, 195 SCRA 641 (1993) Allegations (in the complaint) in general (Rule 8, Sec. 1) Mathay vs. Consolidated Bank and Trust Company, 58 SCRA 559 (1974) Negative pregnant PHILAMGEN vs. Sweet Lines, 212 SCRA 194 (1993) Permissive Counterclaim Korea Exchange Bank vs. Gonzales, 456 SCRA 224 (2005) BA Finance Corp. vs. Co, 224 SCRA 163 (1993) Remedies in case main action fails BA Finance Corp. vs. Co, supra Certification against forum shopping (Rule 7, Sec. 5) Ao-As vs. CA, 491 SCRA 353 (2006) Forum shopping certificate for a corporation PAL vs. Flight Attendants and Stewards Assn of the Phils.(FASAP), 479 SCRA 605 (2006) Amended and Supplemental Pleadings; Liberality Barfel Devt. Corp. vs. CA, 223 SCRA 268 (1993) Amended and Supplemental Pleadings; to conform to evidence (Rule 10, Sec. 5) Swagman Hotels & Travel, Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 161135, April 8, 2005 Supplemental pleadings (Rule 10, Sec. 6); distinquished from amended pleadings Shoemart, Inc. vs. CA, 190 SCRA 189 (1990) Bill of particulars (Rule 12, Secs. 1 to 6); office and purpose Virata vs. Sandiganbayan, 221 SCRA 52 (1993)