Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Capital Judicial Region
Branch 34 , Manila

MARIA MAKILING,
Petitioner,

-vs-

Civil Case No.

For: Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage under Article 36
of the Family Code.

JUAN DELA CRUZ,

Respondent.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

J UD I C I A L

AFFIDAVIT

I, Pedro Luna, of legal age, single, Filipino Citizen and

with office address at Department of Psychiatry, Philippine
General Hospital, City of Manila, after having been duly sworn
to in accordance with law, hereby depose and state that:

I am the psychiatrist engaged by the plaintiff in this case

to conduct the Psychiatric Study and evaluation of the parties;

In relation to the above-entitled case, the counsel Atty.

Maricel Paquiz Dauz at his office located at 4536 V. Francisco
St. Sta Mesa Manila asked me questions which questions I
answered while I was in my clinic, fully conscious that I did so
under oath and that I may face perjury and any other criminal
liability for false testimony;
The questions asked by Atty. Del Mundo and the answers
I gave are as follows, to wit:

1. QUESTION (Q): Madam

Witness,

do

you

know

the

plaintiff in this case?

ANSWER (A): Yes sir.

2. Q:
A:

Why do you know her?

She came to my clinic sometime in May 2011 to

request for a psychiatric evaluation on her person and

that of her spouse in relation to a case of Declaration of
Nullity of Marriage that she had filed.

3. Q: Did you conduct a psychiatric study of the parties in

this case?
A:
Yes sir.

4. Q: Now, could you please tell us the manner by which

you conducted your study?
A:
I did the standard procedure which was to do a
detailed

psychiatric

history

and

mental

status

examination by psychiatric interviews with the petitioner.

I

also

subjected

psychological

the

tests.

petitioner
Collateral

to

battery

informants

of

were

interviewed. The information gathered was then studied

and collated to make a written report.
5. Q: Who were the persons you interviewed?
A:
I interviewed Ms. Helen Teodoro, older sister of the
petitioner Sir.
6. Q: Were you able to interview the Defendant?
A: No Sir.
7. Q: Madam witness, in connection with your study, what
were your findings insofar as the plaintiff is concerned?
A: I assess the petitioner to be suffering from a
personality

disorder

classified

as

Dependent

Personality Disorder Sir

8. Q: In terms that could be understood even by a layman,
could you please elaborate on the disorder of the
plaintiff?
A: This is a pervasive and excessive need to be taken care
of that leads to submissive and clinging behaviours such
as the following: needs others to assume responsibility
for most major areas of her life, has difficulty expressing
disagreement with others because of fear of loss of

support and approval, and feels uncomfortable when

alone because of fear of being unable to take care of
herself.

9. Q: This kind of disorder on the part of the plaintiff, is

this chronic?
A: yes sir.
10.
Q: is it pathological?
A: yes sir.
11.

Q: Does it boarder on a kind of neurosis or

psychosis?
A: It is a neurotic disorder.
12.

Q: Now madam witness, you are trying to tell us

that this Dependent personality disorder is pathological

and chronic. Did it gravely affect the marriage of the
plaintiff?
A: yes sir.
13.

Q: Why do you say so?

A: It had adversely affected the marriage because the

disorder rendered the petitioner
14.

Q: Madam witness, with regard to the disorder of

the Plaintiff, did this disorder exist even before she

entered into her marriage with the Respondent?
A: yes sir.
15.

Q: Is the disorder on the part of the Plaintiff

clinically proven by your findings?

A: yes sir.

16.
Q: Is the same disorder grave and incurable?
A: yes sir.
17.

Q: How about the Defendant. Did you infer any

findings as to his personality?

A: yes sir.
18.

Q: And what is your inference with regards to the

personality of the Defendant?

A: I inferred that the respondent suffers from a
Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

19.

Q: In terms that could be understood even by a

layman, could you please elaborate on the disorder of the

Defendant?
A:

This is characterized by a pervasive pattern of

grandiosity, need for admiration and lack of empathy as

indicated by the following: he has as a grandiose sense of
self importance, he has a sense of entitlement , he is
interpersonally exploitative where he takes advantage of
others to achieve his own ends, he lacks empathy where
he is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings of
his wife and he showed arrogant behaviors.

20.

Q: This kind of disorder on the part of the

Defendant, is this chronic?

A: yes sir.
21.
Q: is it pathological?
A: yes sir.

22.

Q: Does it border on a kind of neurosis or

psychosis?
A: yes sir.
23.

Q: With regard to the disorder of the Defendant, did

this disorder exist even before he entered into his

marriage with the Plaintiff?
A: yes sir.
24.

Q: Do you consider the same disorder grave and

incurable?
A: yes sir.

25.

Q: What then do you recommend as far as the

marriage of the parties herein is concerned?

A: Considering that the spouses both suffer from
personality disorders that are responsible for their
inability to fulfill their marital obligations, I respectfully
recommend to the Honorable Court that the petition for
Declaration of Nullity of Marriage between the parties be
granted, sir.
26.

Q: madam witness, did you put your findings in

writing?
A: yes sir.
27.

Q: if the said written report you mentioned will be

shown to you, will you be able to identify it?

A: yes sir.

28.

Q: I have here a document which purports to be a

psychiatric evaluation report, dated October 18, 2012,

can you please kindly go over it and tell this Honorable

court its relation to the document you are referring to.
A: Sir, this is the same psychiatric evaluation report that
I have made.
29.

Q: Found on the last page of the same document is

a signature above the typewritten name Dr. Clarette

Rosario P. Dy, MD, whose signature is that?
A: It is my signature, sir.

30.

Q: I have no further questions. Do you have

anything to add or retract, Madam Witness?

A: No sir.
31.
Q: Are you willing to sign your statement?
A: Yes sir.

PEDRO LUNA
PRC ID No. 090991
Issued on ,August 4, 2005
At PRC Office, City of Manila

ATTESTATION
I hereby state, under oath, that I faithfully recorded the
questions I asked and the corresponding answers that the
witness gave and that neither I nor any other person present
or assisting me has coached the witness regarding the latters
statement.

ATTY. MARIA FE DEL MUNDO

Counsel for the Petitioner
321 Dela Torre St. Sta Cruz,
Manila
Roll of Attorney 37019
IBP 19012; 1-19-2012; Manila
PTR 911021; 1-20-2012;
Manila
MCLE Compliance Certificate
19; 1-23-16

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this ___ day of 2014,

in the City of Manila, Philippines, affiant exhibiting to me her
proof of identification as indicated below her typewritten
name.

ATTY. HANNAH BACOLOD

Notary Public of City of Manila
U505, Madison Square Bldg.,
332 Taft Avenue, Malate, Manila
My Commission expires on 12-31-2016
Roll of Attorney 32453
IBP 16003; 07-08-2011; Manila
PTR 21034; 08-02-2011; Manila

Doc. No. ______ ;

Page No. ______ ;
Book No. ______ ;
Series of 2014