ANSWER

Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

10th Judicial Region
Surigao City
Branch 30
MYRNA C. NAVARRO, and MARIA

N. RAMOS
Plaintiffs,
-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 8240

FOR: “DAMAGES BASED
ON QUASI-DELICT”
ROLDAN A. FIGUERAS and

ALLEN V. ALABA
Defendants.
x-------------------------------------------x
ANSWER WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

AND COUNTERCLAIM
DEFENDANTS, by counsel, to this Honorable Court, most

respectfully state:
1. Par. 1 of the complaint is ADMITTED only insofar as the

personal circumstances of the plaintiffs are concerned, but DENY
specifically as to the truth or falsity of the information stated in the
Birth Certification marked as Annex “A” thereof;
2. For lack of personal knowledge or information sufficient
to form a belief as to the truth or falsity thereof, par. 2 of the
complaint is specifically DENIED;
Page 2
3. Pars. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the complaint are ADMITTED

as regards the incident that took place on November 3, 2019,
subject of the Traffic Accident Report, but specifically DENY the rest
of the allegations contained therein, the truth of the matter being as
that which is embodied in the Special and Affirmative Defenses
herein set forth;
4. Par. 7 of the complaint is ADMITTED;
5. For lack of personal knowledge or information sufficient
to form a belief as to the truth thereof, pars. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and
13 of the complaint are specifically DENIED.
AND ALLEGES BY WAY OF:
SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, defendants

hereunto state:
6. That in the case of deceased DOMINGO A. NAVARRO,

defendants have shouldered the cost of embalming, the cost of the
daily wake that lasted for one week, paid the cost of the coffin, and
the cost of the burial grounds, as shown in the corresponding
receipts issued by the Funeral Parlor, hereto attached and marked
as Annex “1” and series;
7. That likewise, the defendants have paid the hospital and
confinement bills of plaintiff MYRNA C. NAVARRO for all the days
she was confined at Butuan Doctor’s Hospital, until her discharged
thereof, as shown in the various receipts issued by said hospital
hereto attached and marked as Annex “2” and series;
8. That defendants offered a reasonable monetary
settlement to the plaintiffs to buy peace, but said amount was
rejected as plaintiffs would want to extract more than what the
defendants could afford;
9. That the proximate cause of the accident was purely the
contributory negligence of deceased DOMINGO A. NAVARRO, who
Page 3
because of old age, have ignored the repeated sound of the horn of
defendants vehicle coming from behind and instead unexpectedly
swerved his driven vehicle to the left side without any hand signal
made, not to mention that his driven tricycle was already in
dilapidated condition and without a signal light;
10. That tricycles are PROHIBITED from traversing the

national highway, and this prohibition applies in equal force to
deceased DOMINGO A. NAVARRO who in one way or another
violated the law, thus should bear the consequences of his action;
11. That it was humanly impossible for defendant Roldan
A. Figueras, at that time from avoiding the subject tricycle to be hit,
as the swerving made by the deceased DOMINGO A. NAVARRO to
the left side was done in a careless and reckless manner, not to
mention that he did not apply utmost prudence in the conduct of a
responsible driver of a motor vehicle. In fact, up to now, no
document was ever shown that he was equipped with a Driver’s
License. This is indicated in the Traffic Accident Report which is
adopted as a common evidence marked as Annex “3”.
AND BY WAY OF:
COUNTERCLAIM
DEFENDANTS, reproduce and incorporate the foregoing

allegations and hereunto state:
12. That by reason of the unjustified filing of this complaint

by the plaintiffs despite the fact that the damages that they are now
claiming have been paid, and taken care, the defendants have
suffered moral damages in the form of serious anxiety, sleepless
nights, and mental stress a just and reasonable assessment of
which will not be less than Php 100,000;
Page 4
13. Likewise, by reason of the clearly unfounded civil action

by the plaintiffs against the defendants, the latter had to retain the
services of counsel to handle their defense and protect their
interests, and for which services they have agreed to pay the sum of
Php 50, 000 as Attorney’s Fees.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully

prayed of this Honorable Court, that judgment be rendered in favor
of herein DEFENDANTS:
1. DISMISSING the complaint for lack of merit;

2. AWARDING to the DEFENDANTS, the sum of
Php 100,00 as MORAL DAMAGES, and Php 50,000
as ATTORNEY’S FEES.
Such other reliefs as may be deemed just and equitable

are likewise prayed for.
December 16, 2019, Surigao City.
ALABA-CAGAMPANG-CALDERON LAW OFFICES

Cagampang Bldg. Narciso Street, Brgy. Taft, Surigao
City
Counsel for the Defendants
By:
ALEJANDRA P. CAGAMPANG
Roll No. 79000
IBP No. 06359-1.10.2020. Surigao City
PTR No. 1072870-1.02.2020. Surigao
City
MCLE VI – 0005391 1.18.18
Page 5
VERIFICATION
WE, ROLDAN A. FIGUERAS and ALLEN V. ALABA, both of
legal age, Filipinos and residents of Brgy. Amoslog, Placer, Surigao
del Norte, after duly sworn to an oath, depose and state:
That we are the defendants in the above entitled case that we

have caused the preparation of our Answer with Counterclaim; that
all the allegations contained therein are true and correct based on
personal knowledge and authentic documents.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto affixed our

respective signature, this _____ day of January, 2020, at Surigao
City, Philippines.
ROLDAN A. FIGUERAS ALLEN V. ALABA
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this 16th day of

December, 2019, at Surigao City, Philippines.
ADMINISTERING OFFICER
Copy Furnished:
Atty. Vanessa R. Compasivo

Counsel for the Plaintiffs
3rd Floor Eduhome Bldg. Rizal St., Brgy. Washington
Surigao City

ANSWER

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANSWER

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANSWER

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

MYRNA C. NAVARRO, and MARIA

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 8240

ROLDAN A. FIGUERAS and

ANSWER WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

DEFENDANTS, by counsel, to this Honorable Court, most

1. Par. 1 of the complaint is ADMITTED only insofar as the

3. Pars. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the complaint are ADMITTED

AND ALLEGES BY WAY OF:

SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, defendants

6. That in the case of deceased DOMINGO A. NAVARRO,

10. That tricycles are PROHIBITED from traversing the

AND BY WAY OF:

DEFENDANTS, reproduce and incorporate the foregoing

12. That by reason of the unjustified filing of this complaint

13. Likewise, by reason of the clearly unfounded civil action

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully

1. DISMISSING the complaint for lack of merit;

Such other reliefs as may be deemed just and equitable

December 16, 2019, Surigao City.

ALABA-CAGAMPANG-CALDERON LAW OFFICES

That we are the defendants in the above entitled case that we

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto affixed our

ROLDAN A. FIGUERAS ALLEN V. ALABA

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this 16th day of

Atty. Vanessa R. Compasivo

You might also like