16 December 2020, 10-12 A.M. Assistant Ombudsman Leilanie Bernadette C. Cabras

New Era University
College of Law
New Era, Quezon City
Midterm Examinations in CIVIL PROCEDURE
16 December 2020, 10-12 a.m.
ASSISTANT OMBUDSMAN LEILANIE BERNADETTE C. CABRAS
INSTRUCTIONS. Read the questions carefully. Answer the questions sequentially and in a concise and
grammatically correct manner. Answer the questions consecutively, starting at a new page in the test
booklet for each one. Do not write at the back of the page(s), observe margins and avoid erasures.
1. Liza filed with the Regional Trial Court, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija a complaint for specific
performance against Enrique. For lack of a certification against forum shopping, the judge
dismissed the complaint. Liza's lawyer filed a motion for reconsideration, attaching thereto an
amended complaint with the certification against forum shopping. If you were the judge, how
will you resolve the motion? (10 points)
Liza, as the principal party of the said case shall certify under oath in the complaint or
other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief, or in a sworn certification annexed
provided: 1) that he/she has not initiated, claims or actions with the same issues in the
courts wherever the foregoing are applicable; 2) that he/she will report the similarity of
the subject matter/issue to the court where he/she filed its pending or recently filed
complaint within five (5) days and lastly; 3) that these actions or claims are of absolute
assertion of its current status. Failure of compliance shall dismiss the case upon motion
and hearing. x x x (Rule 7, Sec. 5 of the Revised Rules of Court)
2. Serena filed with the Regional Trial Court of Calamba, Laguna, a complaint for sum of money
amounting to P1 Million against Justin. The complaint alleges, among others, that Justin
borrowed from her the said amount as evidenced by a promissory note signed by Justin. Justin
was served with summons which was received by Ashley, his personal assistant. .However, Justin
failed to file an answer to the complaint within the reglementary period, prompting Serena to file
a motion to declare him in default and to allow her to present evidence ex parte. Five days
thereafter, Justin filed his verified answer to the complaint, denying under oath the genuineness
and due execution of the promissory note; and contending that he has fully paid his loan with
interest at 12% per annum. If you were the judge, will you grant Serena's motion to declare
Justin in default? Why or why not? (10 points.)
Yes. It is a general rule that upon failure of the defendant to answer the complaint within
a reglementary period, the court shall declare such individual in default. Provided, that the said
court gave notice prior the declaration. (Rule 9, Section 3 of the Revised Rules of Court)
Therefore, as the judge of the above-cited case, I am in authority to grant plaintiff/complainant’s
prayer. In view of the foregoing, it may be also exercised by the court to mandate such individual
to submit pieces of evidence as it may be duly delegated by the clerk of the court.
In the contrary, upon declaration of the court that the defendant party is deemed in
default, Justin may still file a motion under oath to set aside the aforementioned. In view thereof,
he must sufficiently prove in his defense that his failure to answer falls within the following
grounds: a) fraud; b) accident; c) mistake; or d) excusable negligence. In this case, the order of
default may be set aside on such terms and conditions. [(Rule 9, Sec. 3 (b), Revised Rules of
Court.]
3. While walking her dog Lassie in a gated subdivision in Quezon City where she lives, Naty P. Lok
stepped on a piece of galvanized iron covering a manhole which was left behind by CCC, a
construction company based in Makati City. As the makeshift cover was not securely held in
place and there were no signs, Naty fell into the manhole. Naty suffered contusions, bruises and
scratches that were treated at a nearby clinic and an anti-tetanus shot for a foot wound due to her
stepping on the galvanized iron, but did not require any hospitalization. She, however, also
claimed that she lost self-esteem, suffered embarrassment and ridicule, and had bouts of anxiety
and bad dreams about the accident, wherein she dreamt that she was falling into a never-ending
dark and dreary manhole.
In addition, Lassie’s hind legs were fractured when she fell into the manhole along with Naty
and one of the dog’s legs had to be amputated due to the severity of the fracture. She wants
vindication for her experience, and for the expenses incurred when she had to go to the clinic and
to bring Lassie to the veterinarian.
A. What action or actions may Naty pursue, against whom, where (court and venue), and
under what legal basis? (30 points)
Naty P. Lok may file an action for damages at any regional trial court within the
jurisdiction of Quezon City, or, as a discretion, at Makati City where the construction
company of CCC is based. (Rule 4, Sec. 4 of the Revised Rules of Court) Since it is
stipulated in the facts alleged that said entity is based within the Philippine territory, it is
therefore NOT considered as a non-resident defendant. In addition, those who rmanage
the aforementioned may not be sued due to the fact that the company is considered, by
law, a juridical person since it is separable and distinctive in nature and character.
B. Based on your answer/s in A, draft a complaint for Naty P. Lok against your chosen
defendant, following the prescribed form under the Rules of Court, as amended.. For
information not supplied in the facts but may be needed for you to complete the complaint,
you can supply your own facts/data. (50 points)
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Manila
Branch ____________
Naty P. Lok, Plaintiff CIVIL CASE NO.

_____
- versus - For: Action for Damages
CCC, Defendant
COMPLAINT
The plaintiff, and unto this Honorable Court, avers that:
1. That plaintiff is of legal age, a Filipino citizen, residing at ______ Subdivision, Quezon City.
2. That defendant B, a construction company based at Makati City, where they may be served with
summons by this Court.
3. That While walking her dog in a gated subdivision in Quezon City where she lives, Nplaintiff stepped
on a piece of galvanized iron covering a manhole which was left behind by defendant. As the makeshift
cover was not securely held in place and there were no signs, plaintiff fell into the manhole and suffered
contusions, bruises and scratches that were treated at a nearby clinic and an anti-tetanus shot for a foot
wound due to her stepping on the galvanized iron, but did not require any hospitalization. Plaintiff,
however, also claimed that she lost self-esteem, suffered embarrassment and ridicule, and had bouts of
anxiety and bad dreams about the accident, wherein she dreamt that she was falling into a never-ending
dark and dreary manhole.
4. That as a result thereof, the plaintiff’s hind legs were fractured when she fell into the manhole.
Plaintiff, along with one of the dog’s legs, had to be amputated due to the severity of the fracture. Plaintiff
therefore had to go to the clinic and to bring her dog to the veterinarian.
5. That plaintiff demands for vindication for her experience and for the expenses incurred.
6. That defendant committed damages and psychological harm to plaintiff.
7. That defendant is summoned to appear to the courts after fifteen (15) days upon receipt of this letter.
Failure to appear will amount to ______ for non-appearance.
In witness whereof, I set my hand this 16 th of December, 2020 at Branch _____, Quezon City, Regional
Trial Court Quezon City, Manila, Philippines.
__________________________
CITY PROSECUTOR
Sworn to me before this 17th of December, 2020 at Branch _______, Quezon City, Regional Trial Court,
Quezon City, Manila Philippines.
__________________________
RTC JUDGE, BRANCH ___

16 December 2020, 10-12 A.M. Assistant Ombudsman Leilanie Bernadette C. Cabras

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

16 December 2020, 10-12 A.M. Assistant Ombudsman Leilanie Bernadette C. Cabras

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

16 December 2020, 10-12 A.M. Assistant Ombudsman Leilanie Bernadette C. Cabras

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Era University

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

Naty P. Lok, Plaintiff CIVIL CASE NO.

The plaintiff, and unto this Honorable Court, avers that:

6. That defendant committed damages and psychological harm to plaintiff.

RTC JUDGE, BRANCH ___

You might also like